Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

dnspolicy: Remove cluster ID generation #959

Open
mikenairn opened this issue Oct 25, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

dnspolicy: Remove cluster ID generation #959

mikenairn opened this issue Oct 25, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@mikenairn
Copy link
Member

We currently generate a unique id which represents the cluster and we use the "kube-system" ns UID for this.

It was required when we supported ACM that we had a consistent unique id per cluster and using this namespace id was determined to be the best way to do that. I'm not really sure if this is really required any longer though since ownership of records(in the provider) now comes down to the gateway/listener/dnsrecord combination and really is nothing to do with clusters (You could have many on the same cluster contributing to the same record set).

Is this needed still, if not remove it?

@mikenairn mikenairn mentioned this issue Oct 25, 2024
7 tasks
@maksymvavilov
Copy link
Contributor

If we happen to have similar names of the Gateway/listener/host... across multiple clusters won't it cause a conflict in the provider? Different controllers will attempt to create identical records

@mikenairn
Copy link
Member Author

If we happen to have similar names of the Gateway/listener/host... across multiple clusters won't it cause a conflict in the provider? Different controllers will attempt to create identical records

Don't see how, you can't create a Gateway with the same name in the same namespace, and the DNSRecord UUID is used for the owner id in the provider. We/I do this for testing locally.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants