Back to bug 2104148
| Who | When | What | Removed | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthias Muench | 2022-07-05 16:32:44 UTC | CC | mmuench | |
| Nitin Goyal | 2022-07-06 05:24:00 UTC | CC | madam | |
| Assignee | nigoyal | tnielsen | ||
| QA Contact | mbukatov | nberry | ||
| Component | odf-operator | rook | ||
| Travis Nielsen | 2022-07-06 20:41:25 UTC | CC | sostapov | |
| Component | rook | ocs-operator | ||
| Mudit Agarwal | 2022-07-19 13:23:53 UTC | Comment 3 is private | 1 | 0 |
| Malay Kumar parida | 2022-09-21 17:56:59 UTC | Assignee | tnielsen | mparida |
| CC | mparida | |||
| Red Hat Bugzilla | 2022-12-31 19:35:14 UTC | Assignee | mparida | muagarwa |
| CC | mparida | |||
| Red Hat Bugzilla | 2022-12-31 19:54:44 UTC | QA Contact | nberry | mbukatov |
| Red Hat Bugzilla | 2023-01-01 08:44:04 UTC | CC | sostapov | |
| Alasdair Kergon | 2023-01-04 04:43:18 UTC | QA Contact | mbukatov | nberry |
| Alasdair Kergon | 2023-01-04 04:46:40 UTC | Assignee | muagarwa | mparida |
| Alasdair Kergon | 2023-01-04 05:17:49 UTC | CC | mparida | |
| Alasdair Kergon | 2023-01-04 05:43:50 UTC | CC | sostapov | |
| Red Hat Bugzilla | 2023-01-16 08:27:39 UTC | CC | jrivera | |
| Red Hat Bugzilla | 2023-01-31 23:38:46 UTC | CC | madam | |
| Malay Kumar parida | 2023-03-09 07:01:52 UTC | Status | NEW | MODIFIED |
| Link ID | Github red-hat-storage/ocs-operator/pull/1922 | |||
| Malay Kumar parida | 2023-03-09 07:08:30 UTC | Assignee | mparida | jthottan |
| Elad | 2023-03-09 07:14:26 UTC | CC | ebenahar | |
| QA Contact | nberry | mashetty | ||
| Malay Kumar parida | 2023-03-09 08:08:52 UTC | Status | MODIFIED | ON_QA |
| RHEL Program Management | 2023-03-25 07:28:33 UTC | Target Release | --- | ODF 4.13.0 |
| Sunil Kumar Acharya | 2023-04-10 12:22:18 UTC | CC | jthottan | |
| Flags | needinfo?(jthottan) | |||
| Jiffin | 2023-04-11 09:25:20 UTC | Doc Text | Cause: The port in RGW service for its openshiftroute was not defined Consequence: Route may end up using the secure port and result in failures for the http requests Fix: Define insecure port properly for the existing openshift for RGW and create new route with secure port Result: Now two routes are available for RGW, the existing route uses the insecure port and a separate route for secure port | |
| Flags | needinfo?(jthottan) | |||
| Jiffin | 2023-04-11 09:25:45 UTC | Doc Type | If docs needed, set a value | Bug Fix |
| Sunil Kumar Acharya | 2023-06-01 15:29:09 UTC | Blocks | 2154341 | |
| Mahesh Shetty | 2023-06-07 06:48:33 UTC | Flags | needinfo?(jthottan) needinfo?(mparida) | |
| Jiffin | 2023-06-07 06:54:15 UTC | Flags | needinfo?(jthottan) | |
| Malay Kumar parida | 2023-06-07 07:17:29 UTC | Flags | needinfo?(mparida) | |
| Mahesh Shetty | 2023-06-07 12:51:45 UTC | Status | ON_QA | VERIFIED |
| Kusuma | 2023-06-14 02:22:40 UTC | CC | kbg | |
| Doc Text | Cause: The port in RGW service for its openshiftroute was not defined Consequence: Route may end up using the secure port and result in failures for the http requests Fix: Define insecure port properly for the existing openshift for RGW and create new route with secure port Result: Now two routes are available for RGW, the existing route uses the insecure port and a separate route for secure port | Previously, http requests ended up using the secure port and resulted in because the port in RGW service for its `openshiftroute` was not defined. With this fix, insecure port for the existing OpenShift for RGW are defined properly and a new route with secure port is created thereby avoiding the http request failures. Now, two routes are available for RGW, the existing route uses the insecure port and the new separate route uses the secure port. |
||
| Kusuma | 2023-06-14 03:09:18 UTC | Doc Text | Previously, http requests ended up using the secure port and resulted in because the port in RGW service for its `openshiftroute` was not defined. With this fix, insecure port for the existing OpenShift for RGW are defined properly and a new route with secure port is created thereby avoiding the http request failures. Now, two routes are available for RGW, the existing route uses the insecure port and the new separate route uses the secure port. | Previously, http request failures occured as route ended up using the secure port because the port in RGW service for its `openshiftroute` was not defined. With this fix, insecure port for the existing OpenShift for RGW are defined properly and a new route with secure port is created thereby avoiding the http request failures. Now, two routes are available for RGW, the existing route uses the insecure port and the new separate route uses the secure port. |
| errata-xmlrpc | 2023-06-21 15:22:14 UTC | Resolution | --- | ERRATA |
| Status | VERIFIED | CLOSED | ||
| Last Closed | 2023-06-21 15:22:14 UTC | |||
| errata-xmlrpc | 2023-06-21 15:23:08 UTC | Link ID | Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2023:3742 | |
| Elad | 2023-08-09 17:00:43 UTC | CC | odf-bz-bot |
Back to bug 2104148