Problem:

Certain Insights Advisor features differentiate between RHEL and OCP advisor

Goal:

Address top priority UI misalignments between RHEL and OCP advisor. Address UI features dropped from Insights ADvisor for OCP GA.

Scope:

Specific tasks and priority of them tracked in https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CCXDEV-7432

Managing PVs at scale for a fleet creates difficulties where "one size does not fit all". The ability for SRE to deploy prometheus with PVs and have retention based an on a desired size would enable easier management of these volumes across the fleet. 

The prometheus-operator exposes retentionSize.

This is a feature request to enable this configuration option via CMO cluster-monitoring-config ConfigMap.

cc Simon Pasquier  

Problem Alignment

The Problem

Today, all configuration for setting individual, for example, routing configuration is done via a single configuration file that only admins have access to. If an environment uses multiple tenants and each tenant, for example, has different systems that they are using to notify teams in case of an issue, then someone needs to file a request w/ an admin to add the required settings.

That can be bothersome for individual teams, since requests like that usually disappear in the backlog of an administrator. At the same time, administrators might get tons of requests that they have to look at and prioritize, which takes them away from more crucial work.

We would like to introduce a more self service approach whereas individual teams can create their own configuration for their needs w/o the administrators involvement.

Last but not least, since Monitoring is deployed as a Core service of OpenShift there are multiple restrictions that the SRE team has to apply to all OSD and ROSA clusters. One restriction is the ability for customers to use the central Alertmanager that is owned and managed by the SRE team. They can't give access to the central managed secret due to security concerns so that users can add their own routing information.

High-Level Approach

Provide a new API (based on the Operator CRD approach) as part of the Prometheus Operator that allows creating a subset of the Alertmanager configuration without touching the central Alertmanager configuration file.

Please note that we do not plan to support additional individual webhooks with this work. Customers will need to deploy their own version of the third party webhooks.

Goal & Success

• Allow users to deploy individual configurations that allow setting up Alertmanager for their needs without an administrator.

Solution Alignment

Key Capabilities

• As an OpenShift administrator, I want to control who can CRUD individual configuration so that I can make sure that any unknown third person can touch the central Alertmanager instance shipped within OpenShift Monitoring.
• As a team owner, I want to deploy a routing configuration to push notifications for alerts to my system of choice.

Key Flows

Team A wants to send all their important notifications to a specific Slack channel.

• Administrator gives permission to Team A to allow creating a new configuration CR in their individual namespace.
• Team A creates a new configuration CR.
• Team A configures what alerts should go into their Slack channel.
• Open Questions & Key Decisions (optional)
• Do we want to improve anything inside the developer console to allow configuration?

Copy/paste from [_https://github.com/openshift-cs/managed-openshift/issues/60_]

Which service is this feature request for?
OpenShift Dedicated and Red Hat OpenShift Service on AWS

What are you trying to do?
Allow ROSA/OSD to integrate with AWS Managed Prometheus.

Describe the solution you'd like
Remote-write of metrics is supported in OpenShift but it does not work with AWS Managed Prometheus since AWS Managed Prometheus requires AWS SigV4 auth.

• Note that Prometheus supports AWS SigV4 since v2.26 and OpenShift 4.9 uses v2.29.

Describe alternatives you've considered
There is the workaround to use the "AWS SigV4 Proxy" but I'd think this is not properly supported by RH.
https://mobb.ninja/docs/rosa/cluster-metrics-to-aws-prometheus/

Additional context
The customer wants to use an open and portable solution to centralize metrics storage and analysis. If they also deploy to other clouds, they don't want to have to re-configure. Since most clouds offer a Prometheus service (or it's easy to self-manage Prometheus), app migration should be simplified.

OCP/Telco Definition of Done
Feature Template descriptions and documentation.

Feature Overview.

Early customer feedback is that they see SNO as a great solution covering smaller footprint deployment, but are wondering what is the evolution story OpenShift is going to provide where more capacity or high availability are needed in the future.

While migration tooling (moving workload/config to new cluster) could be a mid-term solution, customer desire is not to include extra hardware to be involved in this process.

 For Telecommunications Providers, at the Far Edge they intend to start small and then grow. Many of these operators will start with a SNO-based DU deployment as an initial investment, but as DUs evolve, different segments of the radio spectrum are added, various radio hardware is provisioned and features delivered to the Far Edge, the Telecommunication Providers desire the ability for their Far Edge deployments to scale up from 1 node to 2 nodes to n nodes. On the opposite side of the spectrum from SNO is MMIMO where there is a robust cluster and workloads use HPA.

Goals

• Provide the capability to expand a single replica control plane topology to host more workloads capacity - add worker
• Provide the capability to expand a single replica control plane to be a highly available control plane
• To satisfy MMIMO Telecommunications providers will want the ability to scale a SNO to a multi-node cluster that can support HPA.
• Telecommunications providers do not want workload (DU specifically) downtime when migrating from SNO to a multi-node cluster.
• Telecommunications providers wish to be able to scale from one to two or more nodes to support a variety of radio hardware.
• Support CP scaling (CP HA) for 2 node cluster, 3 node cluster and n node cluster. As the number of nodes in the cluster increases so does the failure domain of the cluster. The cluster is now supporting more cell sectors and therefore has more of a need for HA and resiliency including the cluster CP.

Requirements

• TBD

(Optional) Use Cases

This Section:

• Main success scenarios - high-level user stories
• Alternate flow/scenarios - high-level user stories
• ...

Questions to answer…

• ...

Out of Scope

• …

Background, and strategic fit

This Section: What does the person writing code, testing, documenting need to know? What context can be provided to frame this feature.

Assumptions

• ...

Customer Considerations

• ...

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:

• What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?
• Does this feature have doc impact?
• New Content, Updates to existing content, Release Note, or No Doc Impact
• If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.
• What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?
• How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?
• What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?
• Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.
• What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

Feature Overview

• As an infrastructure owner, I want a repeatable method to quickly deploy the initial OpenShift cluster.

• As an infrastructure owner, I want to install the first (management, hub, “cluster 0”) cluster to manage other (standalone, hub, spoke, hub of hubs) clusters.

Goals

• Enable customers and partners to successfully deploy a single “first” cluster in disconnected, on-premises settings

Requirements

4.11 MVP Requirements

• Customers and partners needs to be able to download the installer
• Enable customers and partners to deploy a single “first” cluster (cluster 0) using single node, compact, or highly available topologies in disconnected, on-premises settings
• Installer must support advanced network settings such as static IP assignments, VLANs and NIC bonding for on-premises metal use cases, as well as DHCP and PXE provisioning environments.
• Installer needs to support automation, including integration with third-party deployment tools, as well as user-driven deployments.
• In the MVP automation has higher priority than interactive, user-driven deployments.
• For bare metal deployments, we cannot assume that users will provide us the credentials to manage hosts via their BMCs.
• Installer should prioritize support for platforms None, baremetal, and VMware.
• The installer will focus on a single version of OpenShift, and a different build artifact will be produced for each different version.
• The installer must not depend on a connected registry; however, the installer can optionally use a previously mirrored registry within the disconnected environment.

Use Cases

• As a Telco partner engineer (Site Engineer, Specialist, Field Engineer), I want to deploy an OpenShift cluster in production with limited or no additional hardware and don’t intend to deploy more OpenShift clusters [Isolated edge experience].
• As a Enterprise infrastructure owner, I want to manage the lifecycle of multiple clusters in 1 or more sites by first installing the first  (management, hub, “cluster 0”) cluster to manage other (standalone, hub, spoke, hub of hubs) clusters [Cluster before your cluster].
• As a Partner, I want to package OpenShift for large scale and/or distributed topology with my own software and/or hardware solution.
• As a large enterprise customer or Service Provider, I want to install a “HyperShift Tugboat” OpenShift cluster in order to offer a hosted OpenShift control plane at scale to my consumers (DevOps Engineers, tenants) that allows for fleet-level provisioning for low CAPEX and OPEX, much like AKS or GKE [Hypershift].
• As a new, novice to intermediate user (Enterprise Admin/Consumer, Telco Partner integrator, RH Solution Architect), I want to quickly deploy a small OpenShift cluster for Poc/Demo/Research purposes.

Questions to answer…

Out of Scope

Out of scope use cases (that are part of the Kubeframe/factory project):

• As a Partner (OEMs, ISVs), I want to install and pre-configure OpenShift with my hardware/software in my disconnected factory, while allowing further (minimal) reconfiguration of a subset of capabilities later at a different site by different set of users (end customer) [Embedded OpenShift].
• As an Infrastructure Admin at an Enterprise customer with multiple remote sites, I want to pre-provision OpenShift centrally prior to shipping and activating the clusters in remote sites.

Background, and strategic fit

• This Section: What does the person writing code, testing, documenting need to know? What context can be provided to frame this feature.

Assumptions

1. The user has only access to the target nodes that will form the cluster and will boot them with the image presented locally via a USB stick. This scenario is common in sites with restricted access such as government infra where only users with security clearance can interact with the installation, where software is allowed to enter in the premises (in a USB, DVD, SD card, etc.) but never allowed to come back out. Users can't enter supporting devices such as laptops or phones.
2. The user has access to the target nodes remotely to their BMCs (e.g. iDrac, iLo) and can map an image as virtual media from their computer. This scenario is common in data centers where the customer provides network access to the BMCs of the target nodes.
3. We cannot assume that we will have access to a computer to run an installer or installer helper software.

Customer Considerations

• ...

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:

• What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?
• Does this feature have doc impact?
• New Content, Updates to existing content, Release Note, or No Doc Impact
• If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.
• What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?
• How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?
• What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?
• Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.
• What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

References

• Bootable Ephemeral Installer Image for Disconnected Cluster 0 Deployments

Feature Overview

The AWS-specific code added in OCPPLAN-6006 needs to become GA and with this we want to introduce a couple of Day2 improvements.
Currently the AWS tags are defined and applied at installation time only and saved in the infrastructure CRD's status field for further operator use, which in turn just add the tags during creation.

Saving in the status field means it's not included in Velero backups, which is a crucial feature for customers and Day2.
Thus the status.resourceTags field should be deprecated in favour of a newly created spec.resourceTags with the same content. The installer should only populate the spec, consumers of the infrastructure CRD must favour the spec over the status definition if both are supplied, otherwise the status should be honored and a warning shall be issued.

Being part of the spec, the behaviour should also tag existing resources that do not have the tags yet and once the tags in the infrastructure CRD are changed all the AWS resources should be updated accordingly.

On AWS this can be done without re-creating any resources (the behaviour is basically an upsert by tag key) and is possible without service interruption as it is a metadata operation.

Tag deletes continue to be out of scope, as the customer can still have custom tags applied to the resources that we do not want to delete.

Due to the ongoing intree/out of tree split on the cloud and CSI providers, this should not apply to clusters with intree providers (!= "external").

Once confident we have all components updated, we should introduce an end2end test that makes sure we never create resources that are untagged.

After that, we can remove the experimental flag and make this a GA feature.

Goals

• Inclusion in the cluster backups
• Flexibility of changing tags during cluster lifetime, without recreating the whole cluster

Requirements

• This Section:* A list of specific needs or objectives that a Feature must deliver to satisfy the Feature.. Some requirements will be flagged as MVP. If an MVP gets shifted, the feature shifts. If a non MVP requirement slips, it does not shift the feature.

List any affected packages or components.

• Installer
• Cluster Infrastructure
• Storage
• Node
• NetworkEdge
• Internal Registry
• CCO

OCP/Telco Definition of Done
Feature Template descriptions and documentation.
<--- Cut-n-Paste the entire contents of this description into your new Feature --->
<--- Remove the descriptive text as appropriate --->

Feature Overview

• As RH OpenShift Product Owners, we want to enable new providers/platforms/service with varying levels of capabilities and integration with minimal reliance on OpenShift Engineering.
• As a new provider/platform partner, I want to enable my solution (hardware and/or software) with OpenShift with minimal effort.

Problem

• It is currently challenging for us to enable new platforms / providers without taking the heavy burden on doing the platform specific development ourselves.

Goals

• We want to enable the long-tail new platforms/providers to expand our reach into new markets and/or support new use cases.
• We want to remove strict dependencies we have on Engineering teams to review, support and test new providers.
• We want to lower the effort required for onboarding new platforms/providers.
• We want to enable new platform/providers to self-certify.
• We want to define tiered model for provider/platform integration that delineates ownership and responsibilities throughout new provider/platform development lifecycle and support model.
• We want to reduce time to onboard new provider/platform – ideally to a single release.
• We want to maintain consistent customer experience across all providers/platforms.

Requirements

• Step-by-step guide on how to add a new platform/provider for each tier
• Certification tool for partner to self-certify
• Certification tool results for (at least) each Y/minor release submitted by partner to Red Hat for acknowledgement
• DCI program to enable partners to run CI with OpenShift on their platform
• Well documented, accessible, and up-to-date test suites for providing the test coverage of the partner
• CI includes upgrade testing of OpenShift with partner's components
• Partner component upgrade failure should not block OpenShift upgrade
• Partner code is available in repositories in the openshift org on github with an open source license compatible with OpenShift

(Optional) Use Cases

This Section:

• Main success scenarios - high-level user stories
• Alternate flow/scenarios - high-level user stories
• ...

Questions to answer…

• ...

Out of Scope

• …

Background, and strategic fit

This Section: What does the person writing code, testing, documenting need to know? What context can be provided to frame this feature.

Assumptions

• ...

Customer Considerations

• ...

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:

• What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?
• Does this feature have doc impact?
• New Content, Updates to existing content, Release Note, or No Doc Impact
• If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.
• What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?
• How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?
• What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?
• Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.
• What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

References

• [ Notes - OpenShift Everywhere - Onboarding new providers/platforms|https://www.google.com/url?q=[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1M1zLG2-wmkeCWTS8omN5G8vsDKvDeZfmegsi7cCVh-U/edit?usp%3Dsharing&sa=D&source=calendar&ust=1641920246517943&usg=AOvVaw2ZIl_XuE7OsSr4wCmRjOp3]] 
• OKD Installer Architecture Brainstorming Working Group Meeting Minutes
• New-Platform Documentation Working Group Meeting Minutes

Feature Overview

We drive OpenShift cross-market customer success and new customer adoption with constant improvements and feature additions to the existing capabilities of our OpenShift Core Networking (SDN and Network Edge). This feature captures that natural progression of the product.

Goals

• Feature enhancements (performance, scale, configuration, UX, ...)
• Modernization (incorporation and productization of new technologies)

Requirements

• Core Networking Stability
• Core Networking Performance and Scale
• Core Neworking Extensibility (Multus CNIs)
• Core Networking UX (Observability)
• Core Networking Security and Compliance

In Scope

• Network Edge (ingress, DNS, LB)
• SDN (CNI plugins, openshift-sdn, OVN, network policy, egressIP, egress Router, ...)
• Networking Observability

Out of Scope

There are definitely grey areas, but in general:

• CNV
• Service Mesh
• CNF

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:

• What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?
• Does this feature have doc impact?
• New Content, Updates to existing content, Release Note, or No Doc Impact
• If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.
• What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?
• How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?
• What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?
• Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.
• What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

tldr: three basic claims, the rest is explanation and one example

1. We cannot improve long term maintainability solely by fixing bugs.
2. Teams should be asked to produce designs for improving maintainability/debugability.
3. Specific maintenance items (or investigation of maintenance items), should be placed into planning as peer to PM requests and explicitly prioritized against them.

While bugs are an important metric, fixing bugs is different than investing in maintainability and debugability. Investing in fixing bugs will help alleviate immediate problems, but doesn't improve the ability to address future problems. You (may) get a code base with fewer bugs, but when you add a new feature, it will still be hard to debug problems and interactions. This pushes a code base towards stagnation where it gets harder and harder to add features.

One alternative is to ask teams to produce ideas for how they would improve future maintainability and debugability instead of focusing on immediate bugs. This would produce designs that make problem determination, bug resolution, and future feature additions faster over time.

I have a concrete example of one such outcome of focusing on bugs vs quality. We have resolved many bugs about communication failures with ingress by finding problems with point-to-point network communication. We have fixed the individual bugs, but have not improved the code for future debugging. In so doing, we chase many hard to diagnose problem across the stack. The alternative is to create a point-to-point network connectivity capability. this would immediately improve bug resolution and stability (detection) for kuryr, ovs, legacy sdn, network-edge, kube-apiserver, openshift-apiserver, authentication, and console. Bug fixing does not produce the same impact.

We need more investment in our future selves. Saying, "teams should reserve this" doesn't seem to be universally effective. Perhaps an approach that directly asks for designs and impacts and then follows up by placing the items directly in planning and prioritizing against PM feature requests would give teams the confidence to invest in these areas and give broad exposure to systemic problems.

Relevant links:

• Documentation:
  • Edge Diagnostics Scratchpad, our team's internal diagnostic guide.
  • Troubleshooting OCP networking issues - The complete guide, the SDN team's diagnostic guide.
  • Linux Performance, Brendan Gregg's guide to analyzing Linux performance issues.
  • RFC: A proper feedback loop on Alerts.
  • OpenShift Router Reload Technical Overview on Access.
  • Performance Scaling HAProxy with OpenShift on Access.
  • How to collect worker metrics to troubleshoot CPU load, memory pressure and interrupt issues and networking on worker nodes in OCP 4 on Access.
  • OpenShift Performance and Scale Knowledge Base on Mojo, results from OpenShift scalability testing.
  • Scalability and performance, OCP 4.5 documentation about the router's currently known scalability limits.
  • Scaling OpenShift Container Platform HAProxy Router, OCP 3.11 documentation about the manual performance configuration that was possible in OCP 3.
  • Timing web requests with cURL and Chrome from the Cloudflare blog.
  • tcpdump advanced filters, some useful tcpdump commands.
  • OpenShift SDN - Networking, OCP 3.11 documentation on the SDN (useful background reading).
  • Ingress Operator and Controller Status Conditions, design document for improved status condition reporting.
  • Observability tips for HAProxy, a slide deck by Willy Tarreau.
  • Interesting Traces - Out of Order versus Retransmissions, analysis using tshark.
  • The PCP Book: A Complete Documentation of Performance Co-Pilot, by Yogesh Babar.
  • Debugging kernel networking bug, brief guide to using SystemTap on RHCOS.
  • Troubleshooting throughput issues from the OCP 4.5 documentation.
  • Troubleshooting OpenShift Clusters and Workloads.
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux Network Performance Tuning Guide (PDF).
  • openshift/enhancements#289 stability: point to point network check, a diagnostic built into the kube-apiserver operator.
• Diagnostic tools:
  • dropwatch to watch for packet drops.
  • ethtool to check NIC configuration.
  • iovisor/bcc: BCC - Tools for BPF-based Linux IO analysis, networking, monitoring, and more to trace and diagnose various issues in the networking stack.
  • r-curler to gather timing information about HTTP/HTTPS connections.
  • route-monitor, to monitor routes for reachability.
  • hping(3), a programmable packet generator.
  • OpenTracing / Jaeger in OpenShift.
  • node-problem-detector, a possible integration point for new diagnostics.
  • Using SystemTap by Brendan Gregg.
  • DTrace SystemTap cheatsheet (PDF).
• Visualization and more sophisticated diagnostic tools:
  • eldadru/ksniff, kubectl plugin for tcpdump & Wireshark.
  • ironcladlou/ditm, Dan's "Dan in the Middle" tool.
  • Skydive, network diagnostic and visualization tool.
  • ali, a "load testing tool capable of performing real-time analysis" with visualization.
• Testing tools:
  • stress-ng, a general stress-loading tool (CPU, filesystem, network, ...).
  • mb, the networking benchmarking tool written and used by Jiri Mencak from our Perf+Scale team.
• Case studies:
  • BZ1763206 is an example of diagnosing DNS latency/timeouts.
  • BZ1829779 Investigation details the diagnosis of route latency.
  • BZ1845545 is an example of diagnosing misconfigured DNS for an external LB.
  • Debugging network stalls on Kubernetes, from the GitHub Blog, about diagnosing Kubernetes performance issues related to ksoftirqd.

Feature Overview

• This Section:* High-Level description of the feature ie: Executive Summary

• Note: A Feature is a capability or a well defined set of functionality that delivers business value. Features can include additions or changes to existing functionality. Features can easily span multiple teams, and multiple releases.

Goals

• This Section:* Provide high-level goal statement, providing user context and expected user outcome(s) for this feature

• …

Requirements

• This Section:* A list of specific needs or objectives that a Feature must deliver to satisfy the Feature.. Some requirements will be flagged as MVP. If an MVP gets shifted, the feature shifts. If a non MVP requirement slips, it does not shift the feature.

(Optional) Use Cases

This Section: 

• Main success scenarios - high-level user stories

• Alternate flow/scenarios - high-level user stories

• ...

Questions to answer…

• ...

Out of Scope

• …

Background, and strategic fit

This Section: What does the person writing code, testing, documenting need to know? What context can be provided to frame this feature.

Assumptions

• ...

Customer Considerations

• ...

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:

• What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?

• Does this feature have doc impact?  

• New Content, Updates to existing content,  Release Note, or No Doc Impact

• If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.

• What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?

• How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?

• What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?

• Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.

• What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

Feature Overview

Customers are asking for improvements to the upgrade experience (both over-the-air and disconnected). This is a feature tracking epics required to get that work done.  

Goals

1. Have an option to do upgrades in more discrete steps under admin control. Specifically, these steps are: 
   • Control plane upgrade
   • Worker nodes upgrade
   • Workload enabling upgrade (i..e. Router, other components) or infra nodes
2. Better visibility into any errors during the upgrades and documentation of what they error means and how to recover. 
3. An user experience around an end-2-end back-up and restore after a failed upgrade 
4. OTA-810  - Better Documentation: 
   • Backup procedures before upgrades. 
   • More control over worker upgrades (with tagged pools between user Vs admin)
   • The kinds of pre-upgrade tests that are run, the errors that are flagged and what they mean and how to address them. 
   • Better explanation of each discrete step in upgrades, and what each CVO Operator is doing and potential errors, troubleshooting and mitigating actions.

References

• OpenShift Upgrades Customer Issues Discussion -6/22/2023
• Select Customer Experiences and Feedback on Upgrades

Feature Overview

Enable sharing ConfigMap and Secret across namespaces

Requirements

Questions to answer…

NA

Out of Scope

NA

Background, and strategic fit

Consumption of RHEL entitlements has been a challenge on OCP 4 since it moved to a cluster-based entitlement model compared to the node-based (RHEL subscription manager) entitlement mode. In order to provide a sufficiently similar experience to OCP 3, the entitlement certificates that are made available on the cluster (OCPBU-93) should be shared across namespaces in order to prevent the need for cluster admin to copy these entitlements in each namespace which leads to additional operational challenges for updating and refreshing them. 

Documentation Considerations

Questions to be addressed:
 * What educational or reference material (docs) is required to support this product feature? For users/admins? Other functions (security officers, etc)?
 * Does this feature have doc impact?
 * New Content, Updates to existing content, Release Note, or No Doc Impact
 * If unsure and no Technical Writer is available, please contact Content Strategy.
 * What concepts do customers need to understand to be successful in [action]?
 * How do we expect customers will use the feature? For what purpose(s)?
 * What reference material might a customer want/need to complete [action]?
 * Is there source material that can be used as reference for the Technical Writer in writing the content? If yes, please link if available.
 * What is the doc impact (New Content, Updates to existing content, or Release Note)?

Goal

Increase integration of Shipwright, Tekton, Argo CD in OpenShift GitOps with OpenShift platform and related products such as ACM.

Summary (PM+lead)

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/AUTH-2 revealed that, in prinicipal, Pod Security Admission is possible to integrate into OpenShift while retaining SCC functionality.

This epic is about the concrete steps to enable Pod Security Admission by default in OpenShift

Motivation (PM+lead)

Goals (lead)

• Enable Pod Security Admission in "restricted" policy level by default
• Migrate existing core workloads to comply to the "restricted" pod security policy level

Non-Goals (lead)

• Other OpenShift workloads must be migrated by the individual responsible teams.

Deliverables

Proposal (lead)

Enhancement - https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/pull/1010

User Stories (PM)

Dependencies (internal and external, lead)

Previous Work (lead)

Open questions (lead)

1. ...

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-authentication-operator/pull/570
• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-csi-snapshot-controller-operator/pull/120
• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-samples-operator/pull/425

Epic Goal

HyperShift provisions OpenShift clusters with externally managed control-planes. It follows a slightly different process for provisioning clusters. For example, HyperShift uses cluster API as a backend and moves all the machine management bits to the management cluster.  

Why is this important?

showing machine management/cluster auto-scaling tabs in the console is likely to confuse users and cause unnecessary side effects. 

Definition of Done

• MachineConfig and MachineConfigPool should not be present, they should be either removed or hidden when the cluster is spawned using HyperShift. 
• Cluster Settings show say the control plane is externally managed and be read-only.
• Cluster Settings -> Configuration resources should be read-only, maybe hide the tab
• Some resources should go in an allowlist. Most will be hidden
• Review getting started steps

See Design Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k76JtRRHBdCCEjHPqKcYvbNVsuaGmRhWDLESWIm0mbo/edit#

Setup / Testing

It's based on the SERVER_FLAG controlPlaneTopology being set to External is really the driving factor here; this can be done in one of two ways:

• Locally via a Bridge Variable, export BRIDGE_CONTROL_PLANE_TOPOLOGY_MODE="External"
• Locally / OnCluster via modifying the window.SERVER_FLAGS.controlPlaneTopology to External in the dev tools

To test work related to cluster upgrade process, use a 4.10.3 cluster set on the candidate-4.10 upgrade channel using 4.11 frontend code.

Epic Goal

• Ensure that OCP Admin console can enable dark mode
• Mechanism for switching between light/dark mode, based on user preferences or User Settings in OCP
• Identify changes needed for OCP console's dynamic plugins
• Status as we work through the stories: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18ib0A9ZtSYo1e2aOtM2LtZcsNFs1aRCHXx6NAPsIAso/edit#

Why is this important?

• So the UX satisfies the current trands, where dark mode is becoming a standard for modern services.  

Acceptance Criteria

• OCP admin console must be rendered in a preferred mode based on `prefers-color-scheme` media query
• OCP admin console must be rendered in a preferred mode selected in the User Setting page
• Create an followup epic/story for and listing and tracking changes needed in OCP console's dynamic plugins

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. PatternFly - Dark mode PF variables

Previous Work (Optional):

1. Mike Coker has worked on a POC from the PF point of view on both the admin and dev console, and the screenshot results are listed below along with the repo branch. Also listed is a document covering some of the common issues found when putting together the admin console POC. https://github.com/mcoker/console/tree/dark-theme
   Background POC work completed for reference:

PatternFly Dark Theme Handbook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mRYEfUoOjTsSt7hiqjbeplqhfo3_rVDO0QqMj2p67pw/edit

Admin Console -> Workloads & Pods

• Screenshots: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BoOpXpX96_uNUhVJiEqGUCZ-JMYh1A78fXJhk3H86K8/edit#slide=id.p
• Github branch: https://github.com/mcoker/console/tree/dark-theme
• Github PR for Dark Theme WIP by Vikram: https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/10947{}

Dev Console -> Gotcha pages: Observe Dashboard and Metrics, Add, Pipelines: builder, list, log, and run

• Screenshots: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13jagAf_JEu82hd_KpEHRmj25xCEqwImWpNufzVopuUs/edit#slide=id.p
• Github branch: https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/10815
• Evaluation: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fBCPPb4Z1sqUDKgQkpueGe8VQZo4pBUA9PV4vnFCnDw/edit#gid=0

Open questions::

1. Who should be responsible for updating DynamicPlugins to be able to render in dark mode?

An epic we can duplicate for each release to ensure we have a place to catch things we ought to be doing regularly but can tend to fall by the wayside.

This epic contains all the Dynamic Plugins related stories for OCP release-4.11 

Epic Goal

• Track all the stories under a single epic

Acceptance Criteria

Goal

• Add the ability for users to select supported but not recommended updates.
• Refine workflow when both "upgradeable=false" and "supported-but-not-recommended" updates occur

Background
RFE: for 4.10, Cincinnati and the cluster-version operator are adding conditional updates (a.k.a. targeted edge blocking): https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OTA-267

High-level plans in https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/update/targeted-update-edge-blocking.md#update-client-support-for-the-enhanced-schema

Example of what the oc adm upgrade UX will be in https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/update/targeted-update-edge-blocking.md#cluster-administrator.

The oc implementation landed via https://github.com/openshift/oc/pull/961.

Design

• Use case 01: "supported but not recommended" occurs to the latest version:
  • Add an info icon next to the version on update path with a pop-over to explain about why updating to this version is supported, but not recommended and a link to known risks
  • Identify the difference in "recommended" versions, "supported but not recommended" versions, and "blocked" versions (upgradeable=false) in the + more modal.
  • The latest version is pre-selected in the dropdown in the update modal with an inline alert to inform users about supported-but-not-recommended version with link to known risks. Users can choose to update to another recommended versions, update to a supported-but-not-recommended one, or wait.
  • The "recommended" and "supported but not recommended" updates are separated in the dropdown.
  • If a user selects a "recommended" update, the inline alert disappears.
• Use case 02: When both "upgradeable=false" and "supported but not recommended" occur:
  • Add an alert banner to explain why users shouldn’t update to the latest version and link to how to resolve on the cluster settings details page. Users have the options to resolve the issue, update to a patch version, or wait.
  • If users open the update modal without resolving the "upgradeable=false" issue, the next recommended version is pre-selected. An expandable link "View blocked versions (#)" is included under the dropdown to show "upgradeable=false" versions with resolve link.
  • If users resolve the "upgradeable=false" issue, the cluster settings page will change to use case 01

• • Question: Priority on changing the upgradeable=false alert banner in update modal and blocked versions in dropdown

See design doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nja4whdsI5dKmQNS_rXyN8IGtRXDJ8gXuU_eSxBLMIY/edit#

See marvel: https://marvelapp.com/prototype/h3ehaa4/screen/86077932

Epic Goal

• Add telemetry so that we know how image stream features are used.

Why is this important?

• We have a long standing epic to create image streams v2. We need to better understand how image streams are used today.

Scenarios

1. ...

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.
• ...

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. ...

Previous Work (Optional):

1. …

Open questions::

1. …

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

Epic Goal

• Make the image registry distributed across availability zones.

Why is this important?

• The registry should be highly available and zone failsafe.

Scenarios

1. As an administrator I want to rely on a default configuration that spreads image registry pods across topology zones so that I don't suffer from a long recovery time (>6 mins) in case of a complete zone failure if all pods are impacted.

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. Pod's topologySpreadConstraints

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: https://github.com/openshift/cluster-image-registry-operator/pull/730
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

Goal

Remove Jenkins from the OCP Payload.

Problem

• Jenkins images are "non-trival in size, impact experience around OCP payloads
• Security advisories cannot be handled once, but against all actively supported OCP releases, adding to response time for handling said advisories
• Some customers may now want to upgrade Jenkins as OCP upgrades (making this configurable is more ideal)

Why is this important

• This is an engineering motivated item to reduce costs so we have more cycles for strategic work
• Aside from the team itself, top level OCP architects want this to reduce the image size, improve general OCP upgrade experience
• Sends a mix message with respect to what is startegic CI/CI when Jenkins is baked into OCP, but Tekton/Pipelines is an add-on, day 2 install sort of thing

Dependencies (internal and external)

See epic linking - need alternative non payload image available to provide relatively seamless migration

Also, the EP for this is approved and merged at https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/builds/remove-jenkins-payload.md

Estimate (xs, s, m, l, xl, xxl):

Questions:

• in addition to needing the CPaaS Image available first, have we confirmed the "deprecate first, then remove" requirements?  Per grooming we've assigned Rob Gormley the task https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JKNS-274 for tracking this down.  I will be reaching out to Ben Parees (he is currently on vacation) to confirm from an OCP staff engineer / architect perspective if his approval of https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/pull/841 is sufficient signoff from that end.

       PARTIAL ANSWER ^^:  confirmed with Ben Parees in https://coreos.slack.com/archives/C014MHHKUSF/p1646683621293839 that EP merging is currently sufficient OCP "technical leadership" approval.

Previous work

Customers

assuming none

Epic Goal

• Remove this UI from our stack that we cannot support.

Why is this important?

• Reduce support burden.
• Remove Bugzilla burden of addressing continuous CVEs found in this project.

Acceptance Criteria

• All Prometheus upstream UI links are removed
• Related documentation is updated
• Ports/routes etc configured to expose access to this UI are removed such that no configuration we provide enables access to this UI or its codepaths.
• There is no reason any CVEs found in this UI would ever require intervention by the Monitoring Team.

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. Make the Prometheus Targets information available in Console UI (https://issues.redhat.com/browse/MON-1079)

Previous Work (Optional):

1. …

Open questions::

1. …

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

Epic Goal

When users configure CMO to interact with systems outside of an OpenShift cluster, we want to provide an easy way to add the cluster ID to the data send.

Why is this important?

Technically this can be achieved today, by adding an identifying label to the remote_write configuration for a given cluster. The operator adding the remote_write integration needs to take care that the label is unique over the managed fleet of clusters. This however adds management complexity. Any given cluster already has a pseudo-unique datum, that can be used for this purpose.

• Starting in 4.9 we support the Prometheus remote_write feature to send metric data to a storage integration outside of the cluster similar to our own Telemetry service.
• In Telemetry we already use the cluster ID to distinguish the various clusters.
• For users of remote_write this could add an easy way to add such distinguishing information.

Scenarios

1. An organisation with multiple OpenShift clusters want to store their metric data centralized in a dedicated system and use remote_write in all their clusters to send this data. When querying their centralized storage, metadata (here a label) is needed to separate the data of the various clusters.
2. Service providers who manage multiple clusters for multiple customers via a centralized storage system need distinguishing metadata too. See https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSD-6573 for example

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.
• Document how to use this feature

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. none

Previous Work (Optional):

1. none

Open questions::

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

Implementation proposal:

Expose a flag in the CMO configuration, that is false by default (keeps backward compatibility) and when set to true will add the _id label to a remote_write configuration. More specifically it will be added to the top of a remote_write relabel_config list via the replace action. This will add the label as expect, but additionally a user could alter this label in a later relabel config to suit any specific requirements (say rename the label or add additional information to the value).
The location of this flag is the remote_write Spec, so this can be set for individual remote_write configurations.

Epic Goal

• Offer the option to double the scrape intervals for CMO controlled ServiceMonitors in single node deployments
• Alternatively automatically double the same scrape intervals if CMO detects an SNO setup

The potential target ServiceMonitors are:

• kubelet
• kube-state-metrics
• node-exporter
• etcd
• openshift-state-metrics

Why is this important?

• Reduce CPU usage in SNO setups
• Specifically doubling the scrape interval is important because:

1. we are confident that this will have the least chance to interfere with existing rules. We typically have rate queries over the last 2 minutes (no shorter time window). With 30 second scrape intervals (the current default) this gives us 4 samples in any 2 minute window. rate needs at least 2 samples to work, we want another 2 for failure tolerance. Doubling the scrape interval will still give us 2 samples in most 2 minute windows. If a scrape fails, a few rule evaluations might fail intermittently.
2. We expect a measureable reduction of CPU resources (see previous work)

Scenarios

1. RAN deployments (Telco Edge) are SNO deployments. In these setups a full CMO deployment is often not needed and the default setup consumes too many resources. OpenShift as a whole has only very limited CPU cycles available and too many cycles are spend on Monitoring

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.
• ...

Previous Work (Optional):

1. https://issues.redhat.com/browse/MON-1569

Open questions:

1. Whether doubling some scrape intervals reduces CPU usage to fit into the assigned budget

Non goals

• Allow arbitrarily long scrape intervals. This will interfere with alert and recoring rules
• Implement a global override to scrape intervals.

Problem:

This epic is mainly focused on the 4.10 Release QE activities

Goal:

1. Identify the scenarios for automation
2. Segregate the test Scenarios into smoke, Regression and other user stories
a. Update the https://docs.jboss.org/display/ODC/Automation+Status+Report
3. Align with layered operator teams for updating scripts
3. Work closely with dev team for epic automation
4. Create the automation scripts using cypress
5. Implement CI for nightly builds
6. Execute scripts on sprint basis

Why is it important?

To the track the QE progress at one place in 4.10 Release Confluence page

Use cases:

1. <case>

Acceptance criteria:

1. <criteria>

Dependencies (External/Internal):

Design Artifacts:

Exploration:

Note:

Goal:

This epic covers a number of customer requests(RFEs) as well as increases usability.

Why is it important?

Customer satisfaction as well as improved usability.

Acceptance Criteria

1. Allow user to re-arrange the resources which have ben added to nav by the user
2. Improved user experience (form based experience)
   1. Form based editing of Routes
   2. Form based creation and editing of Config Maps
   3. Form base creation of Deployments
3. Improved discovery
   1. Include Share my project on the Add page to increase discoverability
   2. NS Helm Chart Repo
      1. Add tile to Add page for discoverability
      2. Provide a form driven creation experience
      3. User should be able to switch back and forth from Form/YAML
      4. change the intro text to the below & have the link in the intro text bring up the full page form
         1. Browse for charts that help manage complex installations and upgrades. Cluster administrators can customize the content made available in the catalog. Alternatively, developers can try to configure their own custom Helm Chart repository.

Dependencies (External/Internal):

None

Exploration:

Miro board from Epic Exploration

Problem:

Currently we are only able to get limited telemetry from the Dev Sandbox, but not from any of our managed clusters or on prem clusters.

Goals:

1. Enable gathering segment telemetry whenever cluster telemetry is enabled on OSD clusters
2. Have our OSD clusters opt into telemetry by default
3. Work with PM & UX to identify additional metrics to capture in addition to what we have enabled currently on Sandbox.
4. Ability to get a single report from woopra across all of our Sandbox and OSD clusters.
5. Be able to generate a report including metrics of a single cluster or all clusters of a certain type ( sandbox, or OSD)

Why is it important?

In order to improve properly analyze usage and the user experience, we need to be able to gather as much data as possible.

Goal:
Enhance oc adm release new (and related verbs info, extract, mirror) with heterogeneous architecture support

Epic Goal

• Update image registry dependencies (Kubernetes and OpenShift) to the latest versions.

Why is this important?

• New versions usually bring improvements that are needed by the registry and help with getting updates for z-stream.

Scenarios

1. As an OpenShift engineer, I want my components to use the versions of dependencies, so that they get fixes for known issues and can be easily updated in z-stream.

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. Kubernetes 1.24

Previous Work (Optional):

1. IR-210

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>

Epic Goal

• Provide a dedicated dashboard for NVIDIA GPU usage visualization in the OpenShift Console.

Why is this important?

• Customers that use GPUs in their clusters usually have the GPU workloads as the main purpose of their cluster. As such, it makes much more sense to have the details about the usage they are doing of GPGPU resources AND CPU/RAM rather than just CPU/RAM

Scenarios

1. As an admin of a cluster dedicated to data science, I want to quickly find out how much of my very costly resources are currently in use and if things are getting queued due to lack of resources

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. The NVIDIA GPU Operator must export to prometheus the relevant data

Open questions::

1. Will NVIDIA agree to these extra data exports in their GPU Operator?

I asked Zvonko Kaiser and he seemed open to it. I need to confirm with Shiva Merla

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

OCP/Telco Definition of Done
Epic Template descriptions and documentation.

<--- Cut-n-Paste the entire contents of this description into your new Epic --->

Epic Goal

• Run OpenShift builds that do not execute as the "root" user on the host node.

Why is this important?

• OpenShift builds require an elevated set of capabilities to build a container image
• Builds currently run as root to maintain adequate performance
• Container workloads should run as non-root from the host's perspective. Containers running as root are a known security risk.
• Builds currently run as root and require a privileged container. See BUILD-225 for removing the privileged container requirement.

Scenarios

1. Run BuildConfigs in a multi-tenant environment
2. Run BuildConfigs in a heightened security environment/deployment

Acceptance Criteria

• Developers can opt into running builds in a cri-o user namespace by providing an environment variable with a specific value.
• When the correct environment variable is provided, builds run in a cri-o user namespace, and the build pod does not require the "privileged: true" security context.
• User namespace builds can pass basic test scenarios for the Docker and Source strategy build.
• Steps to run unprivileged builds are documented.

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. Buildah supports running inside a non-privileged container
2. CRI-O allows workloads to opt into running containers in user namespaces.

Previous Work (Optional):

1. BUILD-225 - remove privileged requirement for builds.

Open questions::

1. …

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-4504. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1557. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Seen in an instance created recently by a 4.12.0-ec.2 GCP provider:

  "scheduling": {
    "automaticRestart": false,
    "onHostMaintenance": "MIGRATE",
    "preemptible": false,
    "provisioningModel": "STANDARD"
  },

From GCP's docs, they may stop instances on hardware failures and other causes, and we'd need automaticRestart: true to auto-recover from that. Also from GCP docs, the default for automaticRestart is true. And on the Go provider side, we doc:

If omitted, the platform chooses a default, which is subject to change over time, currently that default is "Always".

But the implementing code does not actually float the setting. Seems like a regression here, which is part of 4.10:

$ git clone https://github.com/openshift/machine-api-provider-gcp.git
$ cd machine-api-provider-gcp
$ git log --oneline origin/release-4.10 | grep 'migrate to openshift/api'
44f0f958 migrate to openshift/api

But that's not where the 4.9 and earlier code is located:

$ git branch -a | grep origin/release
  remotes/origin/release-4.10
  remotes/origin/release-4.11
  remotes/origin/release-4.12
  remotes/origin/release-4.13

Hunting for 4.9 code:

$ oc adm release info --commits quay.io/openshift-release-dev/ocp-release:4.9.48-x86_64 | grep gcp
  gcp-machine-controllers                        https://github.com/openshift/cluster-api-provider-gcp                       c955c03b2d05e3b8eb0d39d5b4927128e6d1c6c6
  gcp-pd-csi-driver                              https://github.com/openshift/gcp-pd-csi-driver                              48d49f7f9ef96a7a42a789e3304ead53f266f475
  gcp-pd-csi-driver-operator                     https://github.com/openshift/gcp-pd-csi-driver-operator                     d8a891de5ae9cf552d7d012ebe61c2abd395386e

So looking there:

$ git clone https://github.com/openshift/cluster-api-provider-gcp.git
$ cd cluster-api-provider-gcp
$ git log --oneline | grep 'migrate to openshift/api'
...no hits...
$ git grep -i automaticRestart origin/release-4.9  | grep -v '"description"\|compute-gen.go'
origin/release-4.9:vendor/google.golang.org/api/compute/v1/compute-api.json:        "automaticRestart": {

Not actually clear to me how that code is structured. So 4.10 and later GCP machine-API providers are impacted, and I'm unclear on 4.9 and earlier.

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-api-provider-gcp/pull/30

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-10622. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

Unit test failing 

=== RUN   TestNewAppRunAll/app_generation_using_context_dir
    newapp_test.go:907: app generation using context dir: Error mismatch! Expected <nil>, got supplied context directory '2.0/test/rack-test-app' does not exist in 'https://github.com/openshift/sti-ruby'
    --- FAIL: TestNewAppRunAll/app_generation_using_context_dir (0.61s)

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

100

Steps to Reproduce:

see for example https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/pr-logs/pull/openshift_oc/1376/pull-ci-openshift-oc-master-images/1638172620648091648 

Actual results:

unit tests fail

Expected results:

TestNewAppRunAll unit test should pass

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/oc/pull/1380

The kube-state-metric pod inside the openshift-monitoring namespace is not running as expected.

On checking the logs I am able to see that there is a memory panic

~~~
2022-11-22T09:57:17.901790234Z I1122 09:57:17.901768 1 main.go:199] Starting kube-state-metrics self metrics server: 127.0.0.1:8082
2022-11-22T09:57:17.901975837Z I1122 09:57:17.901951 1 main.go:66] levelinfomsgTLS is disabled.http2false
2022-11-22T09:57:17.902389844Z I1122 09:57:17.902291 1 main.go:210] Starting metrics server: 127.0.0.1:8081
2022-11-22T09:57:17.903191857Z I1122 09:57:17.903133 1 main.go:66] levelinfomsgTLS is disabled.http2false
2022-11-22T09:57:17.906272505Z I1122 09:57:17.906224 1 builder.go:191] Active resources: certificatesigningrequests,configmaps,cronjobs,daemonsets,deployments,endpoints,horizontalpodautoscalers,ingresses,jobs,leases,limitranges,mutatingwebhookconfigurations,namespaces,networkpolicies,nodes,persistentvolumeclaims,persistentvolumes,poddisruptionbudgets,pods,replicasets,replicationcontrollers,resourcequotas,secrets,services,statefulsets,storageclasses,validatingwebhookconfigurations,volumeattachments
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z E1122 09:57:17.917560 1 runtime.go:78] Observed a panic: "invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference" (runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference)
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z goroutine 24 [running]:
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/runtime.logPanic(

)
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z /usr/lib/golang/src/runtime/panic.go:1038 +0x215
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z k8s.io/kube-state-metrics/v2/internal/store.ingressMetricFamilies.func6(0x40)
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z /go/src/k8s.io/kube-state-metrics/internal/store/ingress.go:136 +0x189
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z k8s.io/kube-state-metrics/v2/internal/store.wrapIngressFunc.func1(

)
2022-11-22T09:57:17.917758187Z /go/src/k8s.io/kube-state-metrics/pkg/metric_generator/generator.go:107 +0xd8
~~~

Logs are attached to the support case

• https://github.com/openshift/kube-state-metrics/pull/85

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1704. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

According to OCP 4.11 doc (https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.11/installing/installing_gcp/installing-gcp-account.html#installation-gcp-enabling-api-services_installing-gcp-account), the Service Usage API (serviceusage.googleapis.com) is an optional API service to be enabled. But, the installation cannot succeed if this API is disabled.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.12.0-0.nightly-2022-09-25-071630

How reproducible:

Always, if the Service Usage API is disabled in the GCP project.

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Make sure the Service Usage API (serviceusage.googleapis.com) is disabled in the GCP project.
2. Try IPI installation in the GCP project. 

Actual results:

The installation would fail finally, without any worker machines launched.

Expected results:

Installation should succeed, or the OCP doc should be updated.

Additional info:

Please see the attached must-gather logs (http://virt-openshift-05.lab.eng.nay.redhat.com/jiwei/jiwei-0926-03-cnxn5/) and the sanity check results. 
FYI if enabling the API, and without changing anything else, the installation could succeed. 

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6647
• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6642

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1417

Description of problem:

AWS tagging - when applying user defined tags you cannot add more than 10

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:

1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6303

• https://github.com/openshift/baremetal-operator/pull/256

This bug card represents work done in https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CCO-257 to set STS endpoints to regional in AWS credentials secrets and is created to facilitate backporting the change to previous releases as required by the backport process [1].

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qbKUl4K9PPW4tCbdDgWSXd5klosX77ifkxQLqzjztGE/edit#heading=h.mml0rz88o0nj

• https://github.com/openshift/cloud-credential-operator/pull/503

Description of problem:

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104275

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:

1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/ironic-image/pull/297

Description of problem:

Manual backport of 
* https://github.com/openshift/cluster-dns-operator/pull/336
* https://github.com/openshift/cluster-dns-operator/pull/339

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-dns-operator/pull/347

This bug is a backport clone of [Bugzilla Bug 2073220](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073220). The following is the description of the original bug:
—
Description of problem:

https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.10/security/audit-log-policy-config.html#about-audit-log-profiles_audit-log-policy-config

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.*

How reproducible: always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Set audit profile to WriteRequestBodies
2. Wait for api server rollout to complete
3. tail -f /var/log/kube-apiserver/audit.log | grep routes/status

Actual results:

Write events to routes/status are recorded at the RequestResponse level, which often includes keys and certificates.

Expected results:

Events involving routes should always be recorded at the Metadata level, per the documentation at https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.10/security/audit-log-policy-config.html#about-audit-log-profiles_audit-log-policy-config

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-kube-apiserver-operator/pull/1422
• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-openshift-apiserver-operator/pull/513

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1428. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

When using an OperatorGroup attached to a service account, AND if there is a secret present in the namespace, the operator installation will fail with the message:
the service account does not have any API secret sa=testx-ns/testx-sa
This issue seems similar to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094303 - which was resolved in 4.11.0 - however, the new element now, is that the presence of a secret in the namespace  is causing the issue.
The name of the secret seems significant - suggesting something somewhere is depending on the order that secrets are listed in. For example, If the secret in the namespace is called "asecret", the problem does not occur. If it is called "zsecret", the problem always occurs.

"zsecret" is not a "kubernetes.io/service-account-token". The issue I have raised here relates to Opaque secrets - zsecret is an Opaque secret. The issue may apply to other types of secrets, but specifically my issue is that when there is an opaque secret present in the namespace, the operator install fails as described. I aught to be allowed to have an opaque secret present in the namespace where I am installing the operator.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11.0 & 4.11.1

How reproducible:

100% reproducible

Steps to Reproduce:

1.Create namespace: oc new-project testx-ns
2. oc apply -f api-secret-issue.yaml

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

API YAML:

cat api-secret-issue.yaml 
apiVersion: v1
kind: Secret
metadata:
  name: zsecret
  namespace: testx-ns
  annotations:
   kubernetes.io/service-account.name: testx-sa
type: Opaque
stringData:
  mykey: mypass

—

apiVersion: v1
kind: ServiceAccount
metadata:
  name: testx-sa
  namespace: testx-ns

—

kind: OperatorGroup
apiVersion: operators.coreos.com/v1
metadata:
  name: testx-og
  namespace: testx-ns
spec:
  serviceAccountName: "testx-sa"
  targetNamespaces:
  - testx-ns

—

apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
kind: Role
metadata:
  name: testx-role
  namespace: testx-ns
rules:

• apiGroups: ["*"]
    resources: ["*"]
    verbs: ["*"] 
    
  —

apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
kind: RoleBinding
metadata:
  name: testx-rolebinding
  namespace: testx-ns
roleRef:
  apiGroup: rbac.authorization.k8s.io
  kind: Role
  name: testx-role
subjects:

• kind: ServiceAccount
    name: testx-sa
    namespace: testx-ns

—

apiVersion: operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1
kind: Subscription
metadata:
  name: etcd-operator
  namespace: testx-ns
spec:
  channel: singlenamespace-alpha
  installPlanApproval: Automatic
  name: etcd
  source: community-operators
  sourceNamespace: openshift-marketplace

• https://github.com/openshift/operator-framework-olm/pull/416

Description of problem:

We need to have admin-ack in 4.11 so that admins can check the deprecated APIs and approve when they move to 4.12.Refer https://access.redhat.com/articles/6955381 for  more information. As planned we want to add the admin-ack around 4.12 feature freeze. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Install a cluster in 4.11. 
2. Run an application which uses the deprecated API. See https://access.redhat.com/articles/6955381 for more information.
3. Upgrade to 4.12

Actual results:

The upgrade happens without asking the admin to confirm that the worksloads do not use the deprecated APIs.

Expected results:

Upgrade should wait for the admin-ack.

Additional info:

We had admin-acks in the past too e.g. https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.9/updating/updating-cluster-prepare.html#update-preparing-migrate_updating-cluster-prepare

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/pull/836

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-10372. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-10220. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-7559. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

When attempting to add nodes to a long-lived 4.12.3 cluster, net new nodes are not able to join the cluster. They are provisioned in the cloud provider (AWS), but never actually join as a node.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.12.3

How reproducible:

Consistent

Steps to Reproduce:

1. On a long lived cluster, add a new machineset

Actual results:

Machines reach "Provisioned" but don't join the cluster

Expected results:

Machines join cluster as nodes

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3615

Description of problem:

When creating a ProjectHelmChartRepository (with or without the form) and setting a display name (as `spec.name`), this value is not used in the developer catalog / Helm Charts catalog filter sidebar.

It shows (and watches) the display names of `HelmChartRepository` resources.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Switch to Developer Perspective
2. Navigate to Add > "Helm Chart repositories"
3. Enter "ibm-charts" as "Chart repository name"
4. Enter URL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IBM/charts/master/repo/community/index.yaml as URL)
5. Press on create
6. Open the YAML editor and change the `spec.name` attribute to "IBM Charts"
7. Save the change
8. Navigate to Add > "Helm Chart" 

Actual results:

The filter navigation on the left side shows "Chart Repositories" "Ibm Chart". A camel case version of the resource name.

Expected results:

It should show the "spec.name" "IBM Charts" if defined and fallback to the current implementation if the optional spec.name is not defined.

Additional info:

There is a bug discussing that the display name could not be entered directly, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2106366. This bug here is only about the catalog output.

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/12130

OVS 2.17+ introduced an optimization of "weak references" to substantially speed up database snapshots. in some cases weak references may leak memory; to aforementioned commit fixes that and has been pulled into ovs2.17-62 and later.

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1438

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-etcd-operator/pull/973

Description of problem:

Currently when installing Openshift on the Openstack cluster name length limit is allowed to  14 characters.
Customer wants to know if is it possible to override this validation when installing Openshift on Openstack and create a cluster name that is greater than 14 characters.

Version : OCP 4.8.5 UPI Disconnected 
Environment : Openstack 16 

Issue:
User reports that they are getting error for OCP cluster in Openstack UPI, where the name of the cluster is > 14 characters.

Error events :
~~~
fatal: [localhost]: FAILED! => {"changed": true, "cmd": ["/usr/local/bin/openshift-install", "create", "manifests", "--dir=/home/gitlab-runner/builds/WK8mkokN/0/CPE/SKS/pipelines/non-prod/ocp4-openstack-build/ocpinstaller/install-upi"], "delta": "0:00:00.311397", "end": "2022-09-03 21:38:41.974608", "msg": "non-zero return code", "rc": 1, "start": "2022-09-03 21:38:41.663211", "stderr": "level=fatal msg=failed to fetch Master Machines: failed to load asset \"Install Config\": invalid \"install-config.yaml\" file: metadata.name: Invalid value: \"sks-osp-inf-cpe-1-cbr1a\": cluster name is too long, please restrict it to 14 characters", "stderr_lines": ["level=fatal msg=failed to fetch Master Machines: failed to load asset \"Install Config\": invalid \"install-config.yaml\" file: metadata.name: Invalid value: \"sks-osp-inf-cpe-1-cbr1a\": cluster name is too long, please restrict it to 14 characters"], "stdout": "", "stdout_lines": []}
~~~

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:

Actual results:

Users are getting error "cluster name is too long" when clustername contains more than 14 characters for OCP on Openstack

Expected results:

The 14 characters limit should be change for the OCP clustername on Openstack

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6355

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/12107

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1677. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:
pkg/devfile/sample_test.go fails after devfile registry was updated (https://github.com/devfile/registry/pull/126)

This issue is about updating our assertion so that the CI job runs successfully again. We might want to backport this as well.

OCPBUGS-1678 is about updating the code that the test should use a mock response instead of the latest registry content OR check some specific attributes instead of comparing the full JSON response.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
4.12

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Clone openshift/console
2. Run ./test-backend.sh

Actual results:
Unit tests fail

Expected results:
Unit tests should pass again

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/12108

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-2895. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

Current validation will not accept Resource Groups or DiskEncryptionSets which have upper-case letters.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11

How reproducible:

Attempt to create a cluster/machineset using a DiskEncryptionSet with an RG or Name with upper-case letters

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Create cluster with DiskEncryptionSet with upper-case letters in DES name or in Resource Group name

Actual results:

See error message:

encountered error: [controlPlane.platform.azure.defaultMachinePlatform.osDisk.diskEncryptionSet.resourceGroup: Invalid value: \"v4-e2e-V62447568-eastus\": invalid resource group format, compute[0].platform.azure.defaultMachinePlatform.osDisk.diskEncryptionSet.resourceGroup: Invalid value: \"v4-e2e-V62447568-eastus\": invalid resource group format]

Expected results:

Create a cluster/machineset using the existing and valid DiskEncryptionSet

Additional info:

I have submitted a PR for this already, but it needs to be reviewed and backported to 4.11: https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6513

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6537

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-3022. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

** europe-west8
** europe-west9
** europe-southwest1
** southamerica-west1
** us-east5
** us-south1
are not listed in the survey

Steps to Reproduce:

1. run survey (openshift-install create install-config without an install config file)
2. go through prompts until regions
3.

Actual results:

listed regions are missing

Expected results:

regions above are listed (and install succeeds in the region)

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6542

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-4250. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

Added a script to collect PodNetworkConnectivityChecks to able to view the overall status of the pod network connectivity.

Current must-gather collects the contents of `openshift-network-diagnostics` but does not collect the PodNetworkConnectivityCheck.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.12, 4.11, 4.10

• https://github.com/openshift/must-gather/pull/338

Description of problem:

Sometimes we see VMs fail to power on when the land on a host that does not have enough resources. The current power on does not retry or leverage DRS to power on the node on a suitable host.

https://github.com/vmware/govmomi/issues/1026

Our code is still making calls to PowerOnVM_Task which, according to the vsphere docs, is deprecated and we should use PowerOnMultiVM_Task instead.

PowerOnVM_Task does not return a DRS ClusterRecommendation, no vmotion nor host power operations will be done as part of a DRS-facilitated power on. To have DRS consider such operations use PowerOnMultiVM_Task.

https://vdc-download.vmware.com/vmwb-repository/dcr-public/b50dcbbf-051d-4204-a3e7-e1b618c1e384/538cf2ec-b34f-4bae-a332-3820ef9e7773/vim.VirtualMachine.html#powerOn:
As of vSphere API 5.1, use of this method with vCenter Server is deprecated; use PowerOnMultiVM_Task instead.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
4.8.x

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:
Sometimes powers on fails requiring manual intervention.

Expected results:
PowerOn should use DRS to ensure it's always successful.

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-api-operator/pull/1064

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1237. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
job=pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-gcp-builds=all

This test has started permafailing on e2e-gcp-builds:

[sig-builds][Feature:Builds][Slow] s2i build with environment file in sources Building from a template should create a image from "test-env-build.json" template and run it in a pod [apigroup:build.openshift.io][apigroup:image.openshift.io]

The error in the test says

Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:21 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Pulling: Pulling image "image-registry.openshift-image-registry.svc:5000/e2e-test-build-sti-env-nglnt/test@sha256:262820fd1a94d68442874346f4c4024fdf556631da51cbf37ce69de094f56fe8"
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:23 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Pulled: Successfully pulled image "image-registry.openshift-image-registry.svc:5000/e2e-test-build-sti-env-nglnt/test@sha256:262820fd1a94d68442874346f4c4024fdf556631da51cbf37ce69de094f56fe8" in 1.763914719s
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:23 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Created: Created container test
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:23 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Started: Started container test
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:24 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Pulled: Container image "image-registry.openshift-image-registry.svc:5000/e2e-test-build-sti-env-nglnt/test@sha256:262820fd1a94d68442874346f4c4024fdf556631da51cbf37ce69de094f56fe8" already present on machine
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:25 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} Unhealthy: Readiness probe failed: Get "http://10.129.2.63:8080/": dial tcp 10.129.2.63:8080: connect: connection refused
Sep 13 07:03:30.345: INFO: At 2022-09-13 07:00:26 +0000 UTC - event for build-test-pod: {kubelet ci-op-kg1t2x13-4e3c6-7hrm8-worker-a-66nwd} BackOff: Back-off restarting failed container

• https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/27480

Description of problem:

[OVN][OSP] After reboot egress node, egress IP cannot be applied anymore.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.12.0-0.nightly-2022-11-07-181244

How reproducible:

Frequently happened in automation. But didn't reproduce it in manual.

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Label one node as egress node

2.
Config one egressIP object
STEP: Check  one EgressIP assigned in the object.

Nov  8 15:28:23.591: INFO: egressIPStatus: [{"egressIP":"192.168.54.72","node":"huirwang-1108c-pg2mt-worker-0-2fn6q"}]

3.
Reboot the node, wait for the node ready.

Actual results:

EgressIP cannot be applied anymore. Waited more than 1 hour.
 oc get egressip
NAME             EGRESSIPS       ASSIGNED NODE   ASSIGNED EGRESSIPS
egressip-47031   192.168.54.72    

Expected results:

The egressIP should be applied correctly.

Additional info:

Some logs
E1108 07:29:41.849149       1 egressip.go:1635] No assignable nodes found for EgressIP: egressip-47031 and requested IPs: [192.168.54.72]
I1108 07:29:41.849288       1 event.go:285] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"EgressIP", Namespace:"", Name:"egressip-47031", UID:"", APIVersion:"", ResourceVersion:"", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Warning' reason: 'NoMatchingNodeFound' no assignable nodes for EgressIP: egressip-47031, please tag at least one node with label: k8s.ovn.org/egress-assignable


W1108 07:33:37.401149       1 egressip_healthcheck.go:162] Could not connect to huirwang-1108c-pg2mt-worker-0-2fn6q (10.131.0.2:9107): context deadline exceeded
I1108 07:33:37.401348       1 master.go:1364] Adding or Updating Node "huirwang-1108c-pg2mt-worker-0-2fn6q"
I1108 07:33:37.437465       1 egressip_healthcheck.go:168] Connected to huirwang-1108c-pg2mt-worker-0-2fn6q (10.131.0.2:9107)

After this log, seems like no logs related to "192.168.54.72" happened.

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1445

• https://github.com/openshift/kubernetes/pull/1509
• https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/27796

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1226. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
We added server groups for control plane and computes as part of OSASINFRA-2570, except for UPI that only creates server group for the control plane.

We need to update the UPI scripts to create server group for computes to be consistent with IPI and have the instruction at https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.11/machine_management/creating_machinesets/creating-machineset-osp.html work out of the box in case customers want to create MachineSets on their UPI clusters.

Related to OCPCLOUD-1135.

• https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/6351

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3346

Description of problem:

When a pod runs to a completed state, we typically rely on the update event that will indicate to us that this pod is completed. At that point the pod IP is released and the port configuration is removed in OVN. The subsequent delete event for this pod will be ignored because it should have been cleaned up in the previous update.

However, there can be cases where the update event is missed with pod completed. In this case we will only receive a delete with pod completed event, and ignore tearing down the pod. The end result is the pod is not cleaned up in OVN and the IP address remains allocated, reducing the amount of address range available to launch another pod. This can lead to exhausting all IP addresses available for pod allocation on a node.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.10.24

How reproducible:

Not sure how to reproduce this. I'm guessing some lag in kapi updates can cause the completed update event and the final delete event to be combined into a single event.

Steps to Reproduce:

1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Port still exists in OVN, IP remains allocated for a deleted pod.

Expected results:

IP should be freed, port should be removed from OVN.

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1455

Description of problem:

When queried dns hostname from certain pod on the certain node, responded from random coredns pod, not prefer local one. Is it expected result ?

# In OCP v4.8.13 case
// Ran dig command on the certain node which is running the following test-7cc4488d48-tqc4m pod.
sh-4.4# while : ; do echo -n "$(date '+%H:%M:%S') :"; dig google.com +short; sleep 1; done
:
07:16:33 :172.217.175.238
07:16:34 :172.217.175.238 <--- Refreshed the upstream result
07:16:36 :142.250.207.46
07:16:37 :142.250.207.46

// The dig results is matched with the running node one as you can see the above one.
$ oc rsh  test-7cc4488d48-tqc4m bash -c 'while : ; do echo -n "$(date '+%H:%M:%S') :"; dig google.com +short; sleep 1; done'
:
07:16:35 :172.217.175.238 
07:16:36 :172.217.175.238 <--- At the same time, the pod dig result is also refreshed.
07:16:37 :142.250.207.46
07:16:38 :142.250.207.46


But in v4.10 case, in contrast, the dns query result is various and responded randomly regardless local dns results on the node as follows.

# In OCP v4.10.23 case, pod's response from DNS services are not consistent.
$ oc rsh test-848fcf8ddb-zrcbx  bash -c 'while : ; do echo -n "$(date '+%H:%M:%S') :"; dig google.com +short; sleep 1; done'
07:23:00 :142.250.199.110
07:23:01 :142.250.207.46
07:23:02 :142.250.207.46
07:23:03 :142.250.199.110
07:23:04 :142.250.199.110
07:23:05 :172.217.161.78

# Even though the node which is running the pod keep responding the same IP...
sh-4.4# while : ; do echo -n "$(date '+%H:%M:%S') :"; dig google.com +short; sleep 1; done
07:23:00 :172.217.161.78
07:23:01 :172.217.161.78
07:23:02 :172.217.161.78
07:23:03 :172.217.161.78
07:23:04 :172.217.161.78
07:23:05 :172.217.161.78

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

v4.10.23 (ROSA)
SDN: OpenShiftSDN

How reproducible:

You can always reproduce this issue using "dig google.com" from both any pod and the node the pod running according to the above "Description" details.

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Run any usual pod, and check which node the pod is running on.
2. Run dig google.com on the pod and the node.
3. Check the IP is consistent with the running node each other. 

Actual results:

The response IPs are not consistent and random IP is responded.

Expected results:

The response IP is kind of consistent, and aware of prefer local dns.

Additional info:

This issue affects EgressNetworkPolicy dnsName feature.

• https://github.com/openshift/sdn/pull/466
• https://github.com/openshift/sdn/pull/456

We will want to establish some basic metrics we can report back to Telemetry.

Let's consider:

• Operator installs
• Backups, created, success, error
• Restores created, success, error

Below is some background info from MTC when we added Telemetry support that may help

See:  https://github.com/konveyor/metrics-queries/blob/master/README.md

• MTC - active customers from telemetry
• Migration Toolkit - telemetry usage tracking
• MIG - Metrics Info

Design/Development info:

OpenShift Monitoring Integration Guide

Sending metrics via telemetry

Monitoring integration with OLM operators

https://www.openshift.com/blog/observability-superpower-correlation

Source Code:

https://github.com/konveyor/mig-controller/blob/master/pkg/controller/migmigration/metrics.go

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-monitoring-operator/pull/1536

Description of problem:

[4.11.z] Fix kubevirt-console tests

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:

1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/12325

Since 4.11 OCP comes with OperatorHub definition which declares a capability
and enables all catalog sources. For OKD we want to enable just community-operators
as users may not have Red Hat pull secret set.
This commit would ensure that OKD version of marketplace operator gets
its own OperatorHub manifest with a custom set of operator catalogs enabled

• https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-marketplace/pull/485

libovsdb builds transaction log messages for every transaction and then throws them away if the log level is not 4 or above. This wastes a bunch of CPU at scale and increases pod ready latency.

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1374

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-8261. The following is the description of the original issue:
—

Description of problem:

An update from 4.13.0-ec.2 to 4.13.0-ec.3 stuck on:

$ oc get clusteroperator machine-config
NAME             VERSION       AVAILABLE   PROGRESSING   DEGRADED   SINCE   MESSAGE
machine-config   4.13.0-ec.2   True        True          True       30h     Unable to apply 4.13.0-ec.3: error during syncRequiredMachineConfigPools: [timed out waiting for the condition, error pool worker is not ready, retrying. Status: (pool degraded: true total: 105, ready 105, updated: 105, unavailable: 0)]

The worker MachineConfigPool status included:

Unable to find source-code formatter for language: node. Available languages are: actionscript, ada, applescript, bash, c, c#, c++, cpp, css, erlang, go, groovy, haskell, html, java, javascript, js, json, lua, none, nyan, objc, perl, php, python, r, rainbow, ruby, scala, sh, sql, swift, visualbasic, xml, yaml      type: NodeDegraded
    - lastTransitionTime: "2023-02-16T14:29:21Z"
      message: 'Failed to render configuration for pool worker: Ignoring MC 99-worker-generated-containerruntime
        generated by older version 8276d9c1f574481043d3661a1ace1f36cd8c3b62 (my version:
        c06601510c0917a48912cc2dda095d8414cc5182)'

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.13.0-ec.3. The behavior was apparently introduced as part of OCPBUGS-6018, which has been backported, so the following update targets are expected to be vulnerable: 4.10.52+, 4.11.26+, 4.12.2+, and 4.13.0-ec.3.

How reproducible:

100%, when updating into a vulnerable release, if you happen to have leaked MachineConfig.

Steps to Reproduce:

1. 4.12.0-ec.1 dropped cleanUpDuplicatedMC. Run a later release, like 4.13.0-ec.2.
2. Create more than one KubeletConfig or ContainerRuntimeConfig targeting the worker pool (or any pool other than master). The number of clusters who have had redundant configuration objects like this is expected to be small.
3. (Optionally?) delete the extra KubeletConfig and ContainerRuntimeConfig.
4. Update to 4.13.0-ec.3.

Actual results:

Update sticks on the machine-config ClusterOperator, as described above.

Expected results:

Update completes without issues.

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3577

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-1717. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

Image registry pods panic while deploying OCP in me-central-1 AWS region

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11.2

How reproducible:

Deploy OCP in AWS me-central-1 region

Steps to Reproduce:

Deploy OCP in AWS me-central-1 region 

Actual results:

panic: Invalid region provided: me-central-1

Expected results:

Image registry pods should come up with no errors

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-image-registry-operator/pull/801
• https://github.com/openshift/image-registry/pull/349

Description of problem:

The alertmanager pod is stuck on OCP 4.11 with OVN in container Creating State

From oc describe alertmanager pod:
...
Events:
  Type     Reason                  Age                  From     Message
  ----     ------                  ----                 ----     -------
  Warning  FailedCreatePodSandBox  16s (x459 over 17h)  kubelet  (combined from similar events): Failed to create pod sandbox: rpc error: code = Unknown desc = failed to create pod network sandbox k8s_alertmanager-managed-ocs-alertmanager-0_openshift-storage_3a55ed54-4eaa-4f65-8a10-e5d21fad1ebc_0(88575547dc0b210307b89dd2bb8e379ece0962b607ac2707a1c2cf630b1aaa78): error adding pod openshift-storage_alertmanager-managed-ocs-alertmanager-0 to CNI network "multus-cni-network": plugin type="multus" name="multus-cni-network" failed (add): [openshift-storage/alertmanager-managed-ocs-alertmanager-0/3a55ed54-4eaa-4f65-8a10-e5d21fad1ebc:ovn-kubernetes]: error adding container to network "ovn-kubernetes": CNI request failed with status 400: '[openshift-storage/alertmanager-managed-ocs-alertmanager-0 88575547dc0b210307b89dd2bb8e379ece0962b607ac2707a1c2cf630b1aaa78] [openshift

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

OCP 4.11 with OVN

How reproducible:

100%

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Terminate the node on which alertmanager pod is running
2. pod will get stuck in container Creating state
3.

Actual results:

AlertManager pod is stuck in container Creating state

Expected results:

Alertmanager pod is ready

Additional info:

The workaround would be to terminate the alertmanager pod

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1422

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-10514. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-10221. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-5469. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

When changing channels it's possible that multiple new conditional update risks will need to be evaluated. For instance, a cluster running 4.10.34 in a 4.10 channel today only has to evaluate `OpenStackNodeCreationFails` but when the channel is changed to a 4.11 channel multiple new risks require evaluation and the evaluation of new risks is throttled at one every 10 minutes. This means if there are three new risks it may take up to 30 minutes after the channel has changed for the full set of conditional updates to be computed. This leads to a perception that no update paths are recommended because most will not wait 30 minutes, they expect immediate feedback.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.10.z, 4.11.z, 4.12, 4.13

How reproducible:

100% 

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Install 4.10.34
2. Switch from stable-4.10 to stable-4.11
3. 

Actual results:

Observe no recommended updates for 10-20 minutes because all available paths to 4.11 have a risk associated with them

Expected results:

Risks are computed in a timely manner for an interactive UX, lets say < 10s

Additional info:

This was intentional in the design, we didn't want risks to continuously re-evaluate or overwhelm the monitoring stack, however we didn't anticipate that we'd have long standing pile of risks and realize how confusing the user experience would be.

We intend to work around this in the deployed fleet by converting older risks from `type: promql` to `type: Always` avoiding the evaluation period but preserving the notification. While this may lead customers to believe they're exposed to a risk they may not be, as long as the set of outstanding risks to the latest version is limited to no more than one it's likely no one will notice. All 4.10 and 4.11 clusters currently have a clear path toward relatively recent 4.10.z or 4.11.z with no more than one risk to be evaluated.

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/pull/915

Description of problem: Backport owners for 4.11 (only)

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/11936

Description of problem:

The last egressIP in IP capacity cannot be applied correctly

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11.0-0.nightly-2022-11-27-164248 

How reproducible:

Found this failure in automation case which used to pass

Steps to Reproduce:

In AWS, one worker node is with IP capacity "ipv4:14"
 $oc describe node ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal | egrep -C 3 egress
Annotations:        cloud.network.openshift.io/egress-ipconfig:
                      [{"interface":"eni-03820ba0eca427fbf","ifaddr":{"ipv4":"10.0.128.0/18"},"capacity":{"ipv4":14,"ipv6":15}}]
                    csi.volume.kubernetes.io/nodeid: {"ebs.csi.aws.com":"i-0cb3ae15bf3cffd9f"}
                    k8s.ovn.org/host-addresses: ["10.0.129.21"]

1. Label above node as egress node
2. Created 15 egressIP objects, each egressIP object with one egressIP.

Actual results:

 13 egressIPs applied correctly , last one is in wrong status.
% oc get egressip
NAME                EGRESSIPS      ASSIGNED NODE                               ASSIGNED EGRESSIPS
egressip-47208-0    10.0.135.200   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.135.200
egressip-47208-1    10.0.162.178   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.162.178
egressip-47208-10   10.0.144.46    ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.144.46
egressip-47208-11   10.0.191.91    ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.191.91
egressip-47208-12   10.0.133.215   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.133.215
egressip-47208-13   10.0.174.207   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.174.207
egressip-47208-14   10.0.176.224   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.176.224
egressip-47208-2    10.0.184.114   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.184.114
egressip-47208-3    10.0.167.224   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.167.224
egressip-47208-4    10.0.187.148   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.187.148
egressip-47208-5    10.0.184.109   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.184.109
egressip-47208-6    10.0.155.208                                               
egressip-47208-7    10.0.134.13    ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.134.13
egressip-47208-8    10.0.142.255   ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal   10.0.142.255
egressip-47208-9    10.0.170.197

% oc get cloudprivateipconfig
NAME           AGE
10.0.133.215   113s
10.0.134.13    113s
10.0.135.200   113s
10.0.142.255   113s
10.0.144.46    113s
10.0.155.208   113s
10.0.162.178   113s
10.0.167.224   113s
10.0.174.207   113s
10.0.176.224   113s
10.0.184.109   113s
10.0.184.114   113s
10.0.187.148   113s
10.0.191.91    113s

 oc get cloudprivateipconfig 10.0.155.208  -o yaml
apiVersion: cloud.network.openshift.io/v1
kind: CloudPrivateIPConfig
metadata:
  annotations:
    k8s.ovn.org/egressip-owner-ref: egressip-47208-6
  creationTimestamp: "2022-11-28T09:13:47Z"
  finalizers:
  - cloudprivateipconfig.cloud.network.openshift.io/finalizer
  generation: 1
  name: 10.0.155.208
  resourceVersion: "72869"
  uid: 0143a07b-0a30-4de8-bfd7-589ed0c3d7dc
spec:
  node: ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal
status:
  conditions:
  - lastTransitionTime: "2022-11-28T09:16:51Z"
    message: 'Error processing cloud assignment request, err: <nil>'
    observedGeneration: 1
    reason: CloudResponseError
    status: "False"
    type: Assigned
  node: ip-10-0-129-21.us-west-2.compute.internal

Expected results:

As IP capacity for this node is 14, so here should have 14 egress IP applied successfully. No cloudprivateipconfig IP in error status.

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/cloud-network-config-controller/pull/83

This bug is a backport clone of [Bugzilla Bug 2089950](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2089950). The following is the description of the original bug:
—
Description of problem: Some upgrades failed during scale testing with messages indicating the console operator is not available. In total 5 out of 2200 clusters failed with this pattern.

These clusters are all configured with the Console operator disabled in order to reduce overall OCP cpu use in the Telecom environment. The following CR is applied:
apiVersion: operator.openshift.io/v1
kind: Console
metadata:
annotations:
include.release.openshift.io/ibm-cloud-managed: "false"
include.release.openshift.io/self-managed-high-availability: "false"
include.release.openshift.io/single-node-developer: "false"
release.openshift.io/create-only: "true"
ran.openshift.io/ztp-deploy-wave: "10"
name: cluster
spec:
logLevel: Normal
managementState: Removed
operatorLogLevel: Normal

From one cluster (sno01175) the ClusterVersion conditions show:

1. oc get clusterversion version -o jsonpath=' {.status.conditions}

   ' | jq
   [
   

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-19T01:44:13Z", "message": "Done applying 4.9.26", "status": "True", "type": "Available" }

   ,
   

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-24T14:57:50Z", "message": "Cluster operator console is degraded", "reason": "ClusterOperatorDegraded", "status": "True", "type": "Failing" }

   ,
   

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-24T13:49:43Z", "message": "Unable to apply 4.10.13: wait has exceeded 40 minutes for these operators: console", "reason": "ClusterOperatorDegraded", "status": "True", "type": "Progressing" }

   ,
   

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-21T02:07:06Z", "status": "True", "type": "RetrievedUpdates" }

   ,
   

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-24T13:53:05Z", "message": "Payload loaded version=\"4.10.13\" image=\"quay.io/openshift-release-dev/ocp-release@sha256:4f516616baed3cf84585e753359f7ef2153ae139c2e80e0191902fbd073c4143\"", "reason": "PayloadLoaded", "status": "True", "type": "ReleaseAccepted" }

   ,

   { "lastTransitionTime": "2022-05-24T13:57:05Z", "message": "Cluster operator kube-apiserver should not be upgraded between minor versions: KubeletMinorVersionUpgradeable: Kubelet minor version (1.22.5+5c84e52) on node sno01175 will not be supported in the next OpenShift minor version upgrade.", "reason": "KubeletMinorVersion_KubeletMinorVersionUnsupportedNextUpgrade", "status": "False", "type": "Upgradeable" }

   ]

Another cluster (sno01959) has very similar conditions with slight variation in the Failing and Progressing messages:

,

,

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.9.26 upgrade to 4.10.13

How reproducible: 5 out of 2200

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Disable console with managementState: Removed
2. Starting OCP version 4.9.26
3. Initiate upgrade to 4.10.13 via ClusterVersion CR

Actual results: Cluster upgrade is stuck (no longer progressing) for 5+ hours

Expected results: Cluster upgrade completes

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/console-operator/pull/715

This is a clone of BZ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2117374 which fixed 4.12

 
Description of problem:
OCP 4.11 introduced the `restricted-v2` SecurityContextConstraint as the default binding for all authenticated users. When a Pod that would have normally be admitted successfully using the `restricted` SCC, but cannot be admitted using a `restricted-v2` SCC, it's not clear to the customer that the problem is related to the default SCC changing from restricted to restricted-v2.

Suggestion is to generate an additional message for this specific use case that makes it clear to customers that they have a workload that is not compatible with restricted-v2.

Example message:
Error creating: pods "nginx-ingress-controller-75bffcfdf8-" is forbidden: the pod fails to validate against the default `restricted-v2` security context constraint, but would validate successfully against the `restricted` security context constraint.

The goal of such a message is to give the customer a breadcrumb that the `restricted-v2` SCC is activated and set as the default, which they may have not been aware of. This would give them a way to find alternatives, such as changing the global default, fixing the application or assigning the `restricted` SCC to the Namespace or ServiceAccount.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
4.11

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install OCP 4.11.0
2. Create a deployment with a podtemplate with .spec.containers[*].securityContext.allowPrivigeEscalation = true in a new namespace

Actual results:
The pod will fail to be admitted with an error such as:

Warning FailedCreate 27m (x25 over 76m) replicaset-controller Error creating: pods "nginx-ingress-controller-75bffcfdf8-" is forbidden: unable to validate against any security context constraint: [provider "anyuid": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, spec.containers[0].securityContext.allowPrivilegeEscalation: Invalid value: true: Allowing privilege escalation for containers is not allowed, provider "restricted": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "nonroot-v2": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "nonroot": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "noobaa": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "noobaa-endpoint": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "hostmount-anyuid": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "machine-api-termination-handler": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "hostnetwork-v2": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "hostnetwork": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "hostaccess": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "rook-ceph": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "node-exporter": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "rook-ceph-csi": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount, provider "privileged": Forbidden: not usable by user or serviceaccount]

Expected results:
Add an additional or replacement error message when there is no SCC assignment other than `restricted-v2` AND `restricted` would have worked:

Error creating: pods "nginx-ingress-controller-75bffcfdf8-" is forbidden: the pod fails to validate against the default `restricted-v2` security context constraint, but would validate successfully against the `restricted` security context constraint.

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/kubernetes/pull/1459

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-2495. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Failures like:

$ oc login --token=...

Logged into "https://api..." as "..." using the token provided.

Error from server (Timeout): the server was unable to return a response in the time allotted, but may still be processing the request (get projects.project.openshift.io)

break login, which tries to gather information before saving the configuration, including a giant project list.

Ideally login would be able to save the successful login credentials, even when the informative gathering had difficulties. And possibly the informative gathering could be made conditional (--quiet or similar?) so expensive gathering could be skipped in use-cases where the context was not needed.

• https://github.com/openshift/oc/pull/1274

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-7885. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-7617. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
Description of problem:

Azure Disk volume is taking time to attach/detach
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Openshift ARO 4.10.30
How reproducible:

While performing scaledown and scaleup of statefulset pod takes time to attach and detach volume from nodes.

Reviewed must-gather and test output will share my findings in comments.

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/azure-disk-csi-driver-operator/pull/71

Description of problem:

This issue exists to drive the backport process of https://github.com/openshift/api/pull/1313

According to the Kubernetes documentation, starting from Kubernetes 1.22, the service-account-issuer flag can be specified multiple times. The first value is then used to generate new tokens and other values are accepted. Using this field can prevent cluster disruptions and allows for smoother reconfiguration of this field.

see: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-service-account/#service-account-token-volume-projection

The status field will allow us to keep track of "used" service account issuers and also expire/prune them.

this is a replacement for: #1309

xref: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/AUTH-309

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:

1.
2.
3.

Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-kube-apiserver-operator/pull/1394

This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-5879. The following is the description of the original issue:
—
This is a clone of issue OCPBUGS-5505. The following is the description of the original issue:
—

Description of problem:

The upgradeability check in CVO is throttled (essentially cached) for a nondeterministic period of time, same as the minimal sync period computed at runtime. The period can be up to 4 minutes, determined at CVO start time as 2minutes * (0..1 + 1). We agreed with Trevor that such throttling is unnecessarily aggressive (the check is not that expensive). It also causes CI flakes, because the matching test only has 3 minutes timeout. Additionally, the non-determinism and longer throttling results makes UX worse by actions done in the cluster may have their observable effect delayed.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

discovered in 4.10 -> 4.11 upgrade jobs

How reproducible:

The test seems to flake ~10% of 4.10->4.11 Azure jobs (sippy). There does not seem to be that much impact on non-Azure jobs though which is a bit weird.

Steps to Reproduce:

Inspect the CVO log and E2E logs from failing jobs with the provided [^check-cvo.py] helper:

$ ./check-cvo.py cvo.log && echo PASS || echo FAIL

Preferably, inspect CVO logs of clusters that just underwent an upgrade (upgrades makes the original problematic behavior more likely to surface)

Actual results:

$ ./check-cvo.py openshift-cluster-version_cluster-version-operator-5b6966c474-g4kwk_cluster-version-operator.log && echo PASS || echo FAIL
FAIL: Cache hit at 11:59:55.332339 0:03:13.665006 after check at 11:56:41.667333
FAIL: Cache hit at 12:06:22.663215 0:03:13.664964 after check at 12:03:08.998251
FAIL: Cache hit at 12:12:49.997119 0:03:13.665598 after check at 12:09:36.331521
FAIL: Cache hit at 12:19:17.328510 0:03:13.664906 after check at 12:16:03.663604
FAIL: Cache hit at 12:25:44.662290 0:03:13.666759 after check at 12:22:30.995531
Upgradeability checks:           5
Upgradeability check cache hits: 12
FAIL

Note that the bug is probabilistic, so not all unfixed clusters will exhibit the behavior. My guess of the incidence rate is about 30-40%.

Expected result

$ ./check-cvo.py openshift-cluster-version_cluster-version-operator-7b8f85d455-mk9fs_cluster-version-operator.log && echo PASS || echo FAIL
Upgradeability checks:           12
Upgradeability check cache hits: 11
PASS

The actual numbers are not relevant (unless the upgradeabilily check count is zero, which means the test is not conclusive, the script warns about that), lack of failure is.

Additional info:

$ curl --silent https://gcsweb-ci.apps.ci.l2s4.p1.openshiftapps.com/gcs/origin-ci-test/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.11-upgrade-from-stable-4.10-e2e-azure-upgrade/1607602927633960960/artifacts/e2e-azure-upgrade/gather-extra/artifacts/pods/openshift-cluster-version_cluster-version-operator-7b7d4b5bbd-zjqdt_cluster-version-operator.log | grep upgradeable.go
...
I1227 06:50:59.023190       1 upgradeable.go:122] Cluster current version=4.10.46
I1227 06:50:59.042735       1 upgradeable.go:42] Upgradeable conditions were recently checked, will try later.
I1227 06:51:14.024345       1 upgradeable.go:42] Upgradeable conditions were recently checked, will try later.
I1227 06:53:23.080768       1 upgradeable.go:42] Upgradeable conditions were recently checked, will try later.
I1227 06:56:59.366010       1 upgradeable.go:122] Cluster current version=4.11.0-0.ci-2022-12-26-193640

$ curl --silent https://gcsweb-ci.apps.ci.l2s4.p1.openshiftapps.com/gcs/origin-ci-test/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.11-upgrade-from-stable-4.10-e2e-azure-upgrade/1607602927633960960/artifacts/e2e-azure-upgrade/openshift-e2e-test/artifacts/e2e.log | grep 'Kubernetes 1.25 and therefore OpenShift 4.12'
Dec 27 06:51:15.319: INFO: Waiting for Upgradeable to be AdminAckRequired for "Kubernetes 1.25 and therefore OpenShift 4.12 remove several APIs which require admin consideration. Please see the knowledge article https://access.redhat.com/articles/6955381 for details and instructions." ...
Dec 27 06:54:15.413: FAIL: Error while waiting for Upgradeable to complain about AdminAckRequired with message "Kubernetes 1.25 and therefore OpenShift 4.12 remove several APIs which require admin consideration. Please see the knowledge article https://access.redhat.com/articles/6955381 for details and instructions.": timed out waiting for the condition

The test passes. Also, the "Upgradeable conditions were recently checked, will try later." messages in CVO logs should never occur after a deterministic, short amount of time (I propose 1 minute) after upgradeability was checked.

I tested the throttling period in https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/pull/880. With the period of 15m, the test passrate was 4 of 9. Wiht the period of 1m, the test did not fail at all.

Some context in Slack thread

• https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/pull/885

Origin tests for the bond-cni

Backport of https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/27405

• https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/27554

• https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3307

Clone of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2106803 to backport the e2e fix to 4.11 and 4.10.

Description of problem: E2E: intermittent failure is seen on tests for devfile due to network call to devfile registry

Deploy git workload with devfile from topology page: A-04-TC01

https://gcsweb-ci.apps.ci.l2s4.p1.openshiftapps.com/gcs/origin-ci-test/pr-logs/pull/openshift_console/11726/pull-ci-openshift-console-master-e2e-gcp-console/1547046629775773696/artifacts/e2e-gcp-console/test/artifacts/gui_test_screenshots/cypress/screenshots/e2e/add-flow-ci.feature/Deploy%20git%20workload%20with%20devfile%20from%20topology%20page%20A-04-TC01%20--%20after%20each%20hook%20(failed).png

https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/pr-logs/pull/openshift_console/11768/pull-ci-openshift-console-master-e2e-gcp-console/1547061730478133248

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible: Intermittent

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Run test for add-flow-ci.feature to test Deploy git workload with devfile from topology page: A-04-TC01

Actual results:

Expected results: Show always pass

Additional info:

• https://github.com/openshift/console/pull/12020

Description of problem:

Whenever one runs ovnkube-trace from an in-cluster pod to a pod in the host network that is in different node, the following spurious error appears despite of the underlying ovn-trace being correct:

ovn-trace indicates failure from ingress-canary-7zhxs to router-default-6758fb465c-s66rv - output to "k8s-worker-0.example.redhat.com" not matched

This is caused because as per[1], if the destination pod is in host network, the outport is expected to be of the form "k8s-${NODE_NAME}", which is true only if either in local gateway or if the source pod is in the same node than the destination pod.

This is already fixed in the master branch[2], but we would need this to be backported to previous releases. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11.4

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:

1. ovnkube-trace from pod in the SDN to pod in host network
2.
3.

Actual results:

Wrong error

Expected results:

No wrong error

Additional info:

References:
[1] - https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/blob/release-4.11/go-controller/cmd/ovnkube-trace/ovnkube-trace.go#L771-L777
[2] - https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/blob/master/go-controller/cmd/ovnkube-trace/ovnkube-trace.go#L755-L769

• https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1436

Description of problem:

Availability Set will be created when vmSize is invalid in a region which has zones, but Availability Set should only be created in a region which don’t have zones.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

4.11.0-0.nightly-2022-10-07-174524
4.10.0-0.nightly-2022-10-07-205844

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:

1.Set up a cluster in a region which has zones. 
liuhuali@Lius-MacBook-Pro huali-test % oc get machine
NAME                                     PHASE     TYPE              REGION   ZONE   AGE
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-0               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   2      34m
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-1               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   3      34m
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-2               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   1      34m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus1-xld58   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   1      27m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus2-chzg8   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   2      27m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus3-7g2mw   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   3      27m

2.Create a machineset with invalid vmSize 
liuhuali@Lius-MacBook-Pro huali-test % oc create -f ms4.yaml 
machineset.machine.openshift.io/huliu-az410-99qcm-1 created
liuhuali@Lius-MacBook-Pro huali-test % oc get machine                                                       
NAME                                     PHASE     TYPE              REGION   ZONE   AGE
huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w                Failed                                      8s
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-0               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   2      35m
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-1               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   3      35m
huliu-az410-99qcm-master-2               Running   Standard_D8s_v3   eastus   1      35m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus1-xld58   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   1      28m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus2-chzg8   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   2      28m
huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-eastus3-7g2mw   Running   Standard_D4s_v3   eastus   3      28m
liuhuali@Lius-MacBook-Pro huali-test % oc get machine huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w  -o yaml
apiVersion: machine.openshift.io/v1beta1
kind: Machine
metadata:
  annotations:
    machine.openshift.io/instance-state: Unknown
  creationTimestamp: "2022-10-08T07:42:28Z"
  finalizers:
  - machine.machine.openshift.io
  generateName: huliu-az410-99qcm-1-
  generation: 2
  labels:
    machine.openshift.io/cluster-api-cluster: huliu-az410-99qcm
    machine.openshift.io/cluster-api-machine-role: worker
    machine.openshift.io/cluster-api-machine-type: worker
    machine.openshift.io/cluster-api-machineset: huliu-az410-99qcm-1
  name: huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w
  namespace: openshift-machine-api
  ownerReferences:
  - apiVersion: machine.openshift.io/v1beta1
    blockOwnerDeletion: true
    controller: true
    kind: MachineSet
    name: huliu-az410-99qcm-1
    uid: bf8f7518-1fa9-4704-bdd7-6d0fde54e38e
  resourceVersion: "31287"
  uid: 303cf672-a2fa-44f3-8793-59801bb78902
spec:
  lifecycleHooks: {}
  metadata: {}
  providerSpec:
    value:
      apiVersion: machine.openshift.io/v1beta1
      credentialsSecret:
        name: azure-cloud-credentials
        namespace: openshift-machine-api
      image:
        offer: ""
        publisher: ""
        resourceID: /resourceGroups/huliu-az410-99qcm-rg/providers/Microsoft.Compute/images/huliu-az410-99qcm
        sku: ""
        version: ""
      kind: AzureMachineProviderSpec
      location: eastus
      managedIdentity: huliu-az410-99qcm-identity
      metadata:
        creationTimestamp: null
        name: huliu-az410-99qcm
      networkResourceGroup: huliu-az410-99qcm-rg
      osDisk:
        diskSettings: {}
        diskSizeGB: 128
        managedDisk:
          storageAccountType: Premium_LRS
        osType: Linux
      publicIP: false
      publicLoadBalancer: huliu-az410-99qcm
      resourceGroup: huliu-az410-99qcm-rg
      spotVMOptions: {}
      subnet: huliu-az410-99qcm-worker-subnet
      userDataSecret:
        name: worker-user-data
      vmSize: invalidStandard_D4s_v3
      vnet: huliu-az410-99qcm-vnet
      zone: "3"
status:
  conditions:
  - lastTransitionTime: "2022-10-08T07:42:28Z"
    status: "True"
    type: Drainable
  - lastTransitionTime: "2022-10-08T07:42:28Z"
    message: Instance has not been created
    reason: InstanceNotCreated
    severity: Warning
    status: "False"
    type: InstanceExists
  - lastTransitionTime: "2022-10-08T07:42:28Z"
    status: "True"
    type: Terminable
  errorMessage: 'failed to reconcile machine "huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w": failed to
    create vm huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w: failure sending request for machine huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w:
    cannot create vm: compute.VirtualMachinesClient#CreateOrUpdate: Failure sending
    request: StatusCode=0 -- Original Error: Code="BadRequest" Message="Virtual Machine
    cannot be created because both Availability Zone and Availability Set were specified.
    Deploying an Availability Set to an Availability Zone isn’t supported."'
  errorReason: InvalidConfiguration
  lastUpdated: "2022-10-08T07:42:35Z"
  phase: Failed
  providerStatus:
    conditions:
    - lastProbeTime: "2022-10-08T07:42:35Z"
      lastTransitionTime: "2022-10-08T07:42:35Z"
      message: 'failed to create vm huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w: failure sending request
        for machine huliu-az410-99qcm-1-cfw6w: cannot create vm: compute.VirtualMachinesClient#CreateOrUpdate:
        Failure sending request: StatusCode=0 -- Original Error: Code="BadRequest"
        Message="Virtual Machine cannot be created because both Availability Zone
        and Availability Set were specified. Deploying an Availability Set to an Availability
        Zone isn’t supported."'
      reason: MachineCreationFailed
      status: "True"
      type: MachineCreated
    metadata: {}