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

KEP: Support Instance Metadata Service with Cloud Controller Manager #1158

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 14, 2020

Conversation

feiskyer
Copy link
Member

KEP: Support Instance Metadata Service with Cloud Controller Manager.

Refer kubernetes/cloud-provider#30.

/sig cloud-provider
/assign @andrewsykim @craiglpeters @justaugustus

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. label Jul 22, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 22, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/kep Categorizes KEP tracking issues and PRs modifying the KEP directory label Jul 22, 2019
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

/assign @cheftako

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

@khenidak @andrewsykim @justinsb addressed comments. PTAL.

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

andrewsykim commented Jul 29, 2019

In theory you could do this today by:

  1. disabling the Instances interface on the CCM
  2. deploying a custom DaemonSet to sync metadata with node addresses

The only caveat is that you can't sync the node initialization taint with the DaemonSet. #1003 would fix that though. But, you could register kubelet with some provider-specific taint and untaint that from the DaemonSet after the node is updated.

With these changes, the whole node initialization workflow would be:

- Kubelet specifying `--cloud-provider=external` will add a taint `node.cloudprovider.kubernetes.io/uninitialized` with an effect NoSchedule during initialization.
- `cloud-node-manager` would initialize the node again with `Instances` and `Zones`.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

how would this be deployed? Does it need any special cases on Linux/Windows?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it is running as a daemonset on Linux nodes, I think it can be also running as the daemonset on Windows.

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

@andrewsykim @feiskyer -- what are next steps here?

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

I asked @feiskyer to demo this in the SIG meeting but it's been hard to schedule this given the timezone difference. I think we want to keep this option open for cloud providers that run into quota issues but we're not making this the standard for all providers.

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

@andrewsykim -- Maybe @feiskyer can record a demo and post it here and to the mailing list for discussion?

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

That sounds good to me

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

I won't be at KubeCON this time around but I'm sure @cheftako @nckturner @yastij would be interested

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

@andrewsykim @cheftako @nckturner @yastij @justaugustus Marked the KEP as implementable as we talked about on KubeCon NA, PTAL

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

feiskyer commented Jan 4, 2020

@aojea
Copy link
Member

aojea commented Jan 4, 2020

Sorry for chiming it so late, I didn't see this KEP previously.
Seems that this is only IPv4 specific, usually the metadata address is 169.254.169.254.
Should this be mentioned or are there any plans to support IPv6 in the long term?

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

feiskyer commented Jan 5, 2020

The KEP is not coupled with IPv4, it aims to support IMDS to reduce number of cloud provider API calls. It also works for IPv6 if the cloud provider supports IPv6 for IMDS.

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

Pinged in Slack to raise reviewers: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C718BPBQ8/p1578497779005800

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/provider/azure Issues or PRs related to azure provider labels Jan 10, 2020
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

The KEP is now moved to provider Azure

/area provider/azure
@justaugustus @craiglpeters PTAL

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

I think keeping this in scope for Azure makes sense, we should share this with other subprojects/providers to see if we should make this generally available for everyone. I added @feiskyer's demo video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47rK-xLG_88) in the next SIG agenda meeting to see if other providers are interested in this.

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

@feiskyer -- Will review next week.

Copy link
Member

@andyzhangx andyzhangx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 14, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andyzhangx, feiskyer

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 82080cd into kubernetes:master Jan 14, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.18 milestone Jan 14, 2020
@feiskyer feiskyer deleted the ccm-imds branch January 15, 2020 08:39
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

andrewsykim commented Feb 13, 2020

@aoxn this sounds like it would be useful to you based on the API rate limiting issues you've brought up.

@aoxn
Copy link
Contributor

aoxn commented Feb 14, 2020

@andrewsykim Hi, thanks for the notification. I do have a question, A cloud-node-manager daemonset means that 5k Concurrent CMDS API(NodeAddress reconcile) call would be issued to CloudAPI in a cluster with 5k nodes? Is this would be a new throttle in API call?

Actually, we already face this issue in some daemonset in large scale cluster.

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

The cloud-node-manager daemonset would reconcile using instance metadata though (usually separate from cloud API).

@aoxn
Copy link
Contributor

aoxn commented Feb 14, 2020

@andrewsykim Is there any chances that instance metadata might be throttled ? As far as i know, alibaba cloud `s instance metadata is another kind of Center API System which might have its own rate limit. How about azure? @feiskyer

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

Is there any chances that instance metadata might be throttled? As far as i know, alibaba cloud `s instance metadata is another kind of Center API System which might have its own rate limit. How about azure?

Not sure, it depends on the Cloud implementations. But even there're possibilities, large throughput should be allowed compared to Cloud API.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/provider/azure Issues or PRs related to azure provider cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/kep Categorizes KEP tracking issues and PRs modifying the KEP directory lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.