Bug 1367724 – [public_networking_54]ingress ip should not be assigned ip by ingress controller for cloud vm cluster

Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.

Bug 1367724 - [public_networking_54]ingress ip should not be assigned ip by ingress controller for cloud vm cluster

Summary:	[public_networking_54]ingress ip should not be assigned ip by ingress control...

Status:	CLOSED ERRATA

Aliases:	None

Product:	OpenShift Container Platform
Classification:	Red Hat
Component:	Networking (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	3.3.0
Hardware:	All All

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Maru Newby
QA Contact:	zhaozhanqi
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2016-08-17 06:23 EDT by zhaozhanqi
Modified:	2017-03-08 13 EST (History)
CC List:	4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	No Doc Update
Doc Text:	This bug was filed and fixed before the feature in question was released, so no docs are required.
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2016-09-27 05:44:38 EDT
Type:	Bug
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

External Trackers
Tracker	ID	Priority	Status	Summary	Last Updated
Origin (Github)	10455	None	None	None	2016-08-17 08:27 EDT
Red Hat Product Errata	RHBA-2016:1933	normal	SHIPPED_LIVE	Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 3.3 Release Advisory	2016-09-27 09:24:36 EDT

Groups: None (edit)

Description zhaozhanqi 2016-08-17 06:23:29 EDT

Description of problem:

ingress ip should not be assigned by ingress controller for cloud vm cluster. since it should be configure the cloud-specific load balancers

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
openshift version
openshift v3.3.0.21
kubernetes v1.3.0+507d3a7
etcd 2.3.0+git


How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Set 'ingressIPNetworkCIDR: 172.31.0.0/16' in master-config.yaml

2. Restart the master service
3. Create one 'LoadBalancer' type service
4. oc get svc

Actual results:

the ingress ip was assigned 

# oc get svc ws-unsecure -o yaml
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
  creationTimestamp: 2016-08-17T03:13:03Z
  labels:
    name: ws-unsecure
  name: ws-unsecure
  namespace: default
  resourceVersion: "9431"
  selfLink: /api/v1/namespaces/default/services/ws-unsecure
  uid: 82e1651a-6428-11e6-adfd-0e7bf32fd285
spec:
  clusterIP: 172.30.11.17
  deprecatedPublicIPs:
  - 172.31.4.231
  externalIPs:
  - 172.31.4.231
  portalIP: 172.30.11.17
  ports:
  - name: http
    nodePort: 31922
    port: 27017
    protocol: TCP
    targetPort: 9999
  selector:
    name: hello-websocket
  sessionAffinity: None
  type: LoadBalancer
status:
  loadBalancer:
    ingress:
    - ip: 172.31.4.231


Expected results:

ingress ip should not be assigned for cloud vm cluster.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Maru Newby 2016-08-17 08:27:57 EDT

This is a known problem and a fix is in process.

Comment 2 Troy Dawson 2016-08-19 17:14:25 EDT

This has been merged into ose and is in OSE v3.3.0.23 or newer.

Comment 4 zhaozhanqi 2016-08-22 02:43:36 EDT

verified this bug on 

openshift version
openshift v3.3.0.23-dirty
kubernetes v1.3.0+507d3a7
etcd 2.3.0+git

When given an ingressIPNetworkCIDR option on master-config.yaml. the master service will cannot be started.
and check the log from journalctl -xe:
networkConfig.ingressIPNetworkCIDR[0]: Invalid value: "10.66.0.0/16": should not be provided when a cloud-provider is enabled

Comment 6 errata-xmlrpc 2016-09-27 05:44:38 EDT

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016:1933

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