Bug 1852798

Also in the following installation docs, it is mentioned that:
---
For each control plane machine, OpenShift Container Platform also `requires a SRV DNS record` for etcd server on that machine with priority 0, weight 10 and port 2380. 
---

However, etcd DNS records are not required in Openshift v4.4 and above as the new etcd cluster operator makes these DNS records obsolete. Here is the list of pull requests implemented in OpenShift 4.4:

 [Bug 1813003: etcd: remove etcd DNS entries because etcd no longer uses DNS #3265]
 - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/3265

 [Bug 1811071: remove dns lookups #233]
 - https://github.com/openshift/cluster-etcd-operator/pull/233


https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_vsphere/installing-vsphere.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_vsphere/installing-vsphere-network-customizations.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_vsphere/installing-restricted-networks-vsphere.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_ibm_power/installing-ibm-power.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_ibm_power/installing-restricted-networks-ibm-power.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_ibm_z/installing-ibm-z.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_ibm_z/installing-restricted-networks-ibm-z.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_bare_metal/installing-bare-metal.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_bare_metal/installing-bare-metal-network-customizations.html
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.4/installing/installing_bare_metal/installing-restricted-networks-bare-metal.html

[QA FAILED] (moving to ASSIGNED)

Please see my comments within PR#30950[1], there are more things to modify/remove from the documentation like the control plane cloudformation template extra stuff.

That template is based on the default one provided by Engineering here[2], therefore I've raised PR#4795[3] so they can confirm first if my proposed changes are correct.

[1] - https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/30950 
[2] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/upi/aws/cloudformation/05_cluster_master_nodes.yaml
[3] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/4795

Best Regards.

@pamoedom I would like to know the status of https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/4795 so that I can work on this bug.

Hi Chinmayi, as you can see within openshift/installer#4795, Matthew is trying to get a successful "e2e-aws-upi" test before approving the changes, from my side I've tested them and it works as expected, not sure if there is any possibility of expediting the merge without having that test in place, I'll let Matthew to comment on that part, is not my call.

Regards.

Closing this bug since it is dependent on this PR: https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/4795
Once this PR is verified and merged, the bug can be reopened.

Hi Chinmayi, we have finally made some progress here, we have closed old/broken PR#4795[1] and pushed the definite changes via PR#5764[2].

I'm reopening this BZ and targeting 4.11, please take a look when you have a chance, thanks.

[1] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/4795
[2] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/5764

@pamoedom - Does this bug still exist in Azure and GCP?

Hi Shuba, AFAIK, for Azure and GCP, the documentation was already fixed, I can't find the GCP BZ, but here[1] you have the Azure one.

[1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964380

Best Regards.

PR - https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/52582

(In reply to Shubha Narayanan from comment #31)
> PR - https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/52582

@pamoedom - Can you please help me with your review?

Hi Shubha, those changes are not sufficient, we need to also modify the cloudformation template examples accordingly, please take a look at this[1] PR for the exact changes, thanks.

[1] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/5764

Regards.

@pamoedom - I understand that this has been discussed previously in the bug too. However, i do not see that issue anymore. The template example directly points to the repo that your PR was raised for Here's the example https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.11/installing/installing_aws/installing-aws-user-infra.html#installation-cloudformation-control-plane_installing-aws-user-infra

Yes Shubha, in 4.11 seems to be the case, but your PR mentions "Version(s): 4.8+", right?

However, if those templates are loaded directly from the installer repo (I wasn't aware), maybe we should re-target your PR for 4.11 only?

Regards.

If the changes to installer repo was targeted only for 4.11+, I will make that change. But does that mean there are no changes required for 4.8 - 4.10 as mentioned in the bug?

(In reply to Shubha Narayanan from comment #36)
> If the changes to installer repo was targeted only for 4.11+, I will make
> that change. But does that mean there are no changes required for 4.8 - 4.10
> as mentioned in the bug?


@pamoedom - Can you confirm that no changes are required in doc for 4.8-4.10?

Hi Shubha, AFAIK, those changes are needed for all supported versions higher than 4.4, which in this moment means 4.8+, however, if the cloudformation templates are directly linked with the installer repository, then I'm not sure if the backport could be requested for those, quoting Matthew from PR#5764[1]:

~~~
I do not think it warrants backporting. There are no side effects of this other than some unnecessary DNS records in the private hosted zone.
~~~

In summary, let's push the changes to 4.11+ to keep the documentation homogeneous, thanks.

[1] - https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/5764#issuecomment-1093302736