Bug 2076809
| Summary: | metal OVN: NetworkPolicy [LinuxOnly] NetworkPolicy between server and client should ...: 80: connect: no route to host | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | OpenShift Container Platform | Reporter: | W. Trevor King <wking> |
| Component: | Networking | Assignee: | Jacob Tanenbaum <jtanenba> |
| Networking sub component: | ovn-kubernetes | QA Contact: | Anurag saxena <anusaxen> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | Docs Contact: | |
| Severity: | high | ||
| Priority: | unspecified | CC: | bbennett, sippy, vpickard |
| Version: | 4.8 | Keywords: | Regression |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-04-22 15:37:53 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
W. Trevor King
2022-04-19 22:42:14 UTC
Per [1], we're asking the following questions to evaluate whether or not this bug warrants blocking an upgrade edge from either the previous X.Y or X.Y.Z. The ultimate goal is to avoid delivering an update which introduces new risk or reduces cluster functionality in any way. Sample answers are provided to give more context and the ImpactStatementRequested label has been added to this bug. When responding, please remove ImpactStatementRequested and set the ImpactStatementProposed label. The expectation is that the assignee answers these questions. Who is impacted? If we have to block upgrade edges based on this issue, which edges would need blocking? * example: Customers upgrading from 4.y.Z to 4.y+1.z running on GCP with thousands of namespaces, approximately 5% of the subscribed fleet * example: All customers upgrading from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z fail approximately 10% of the time What is the impact? Is it serious enough to warrant blocking edges? * example: Up to 2 minute disruption in edge routing * example: Up to 90 seconds of API downtime * example: etcd loses quorum and you have to restore from backup How involved is remediation (even moderately serious impacts might be acceptable if they are easy to mitigate)? * example: Issue resolves itself after five minutes * example: Admin uses oc to fix things * example: Admin must SSH to hosts, restore from backups, or other non standard admin activities Is this a regression (if all previous versions were also vulnerable, updating to the new, vulnerable version does not increase exposure)? * example: No, it has always been like this we just never noticed * example: Yes, from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z Or 4.y.z to 4.y.z+1 [1]: https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/update/update-blocker-lifecycle/README.md#impact-statement-request *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2077370 *** Impact-statement request has moved to [1]. [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2074839#c1 |