Bug 1303232 - [RFE] Supporting non HTTP[s](80/443) traffic routes [traffic ingress]
Summary: [RFE] Supporting non HTTP[s](80/443) traffic routes [traffic ingress]
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1287471
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: RFE
Version: 3.1.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
high
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Mike Barrett
QA Contact: Johnny Liu
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-01-29 21:44 UTC by Eric Jones
Modified: 2023-09-14 03:17 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-02-22 16:09:16 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Eric Jones 2016-01-29 21:44:32 UTC
Description of problem:
Allow services/applications to bind to not http(s) ports such as an application hosting content at 80 and 443 but have a rest cli at 8180. We should be able to expose multiple ports from one service or expose more than one service, and its port, on a single pod.

Additional info:
Currently the view point for this issue is that we do not support non-http(s)/non-SNI but that it is loosely possible by customizing the router. But there has also been disagreement on the viability of actually exposing these because of how ports should be handled or are handled.

It has been discussed what needs to be modified, the NodePort, which may or may not be non-functional, the HostPort, or the HostNetwork.

I was able to find a trello card [0] that discusses this topic.

[0] https://trello.com/c/9TXvMeS2/54-13-supporting-non-http-s-80-443-traffic-routes-traffic-ingress

Comment 5 Clayton Coleman 2016-02-07 19:40:20 UTC
Our default answer for exposing ports in NodePort.  We should ensure we have clear requirements about what the gaps are in the existing NodePort solution (claiming known ports) so that whatever is built on top of service node ports are clear.

Comment 9 Dan McPherson 2016-02-22 16:09:16 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1287471 ***

Comment 10 Red Hat Bugzilla 2023-09-14 03:17:00 UTC
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.