verified in "4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest" ci image. With the patch revert in place, the unformatted hostnames are now accepted and functional:
-------
oc get clusterversion
NAME VERSION AVAILABLE PROGRESSING SINCE STATUS
version 4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest True False 10m Cluster version is 4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest
oc get svc
NAME TYPE CLUSTER-IP EXTERNAL-IP PORT(S) AGE
service/service-secure ClusterIP 172.30.209.51 <none> 27443/TCP 7s
service/service-unsecure ClusterIP 172.30.60.116 <none> 27017/TCP 6s
oc expose svc service-unsecure --hostname=foobar
route.route.openshift.io/service-unsecure exposed
oc get route service-unsecure -o yaml
apiVersion: route.openshift.io/v1
kind: Route
metadata:
creationTimestamp: "2021-06-02T04:17:38Z"
labels:
name: service-unsecure
name: service-unsecure
namespace: test1a
resourceVersion: "32749"
uid: 1db916cd-722e-456b-ac89-55331183bed2
spec:
host: foobar
port:
targetPort: http
to:
kind: Service
name: service-unsecure
weight: 100
wildcardPolicy: None
status:
ingress:
- conditions:
- lastTransitionTime: "2021-06-02T04:17:39Z"
status: "True"
type: Admitted
host: foobar
routerCanonicalHostname: apps.ci-ln-rv5lck2-f76d1.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.openshift.com
routerName: default
wildcardPolicy: None
-------
Comment 3Lalatendu Mohanty
2021-06-02 13:08:55 UTC
Copying the comment from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957584#c21 as it is more appropriate for the bug with 4.7.z target release.
We are not considering this as UpgradeBlocker because we don't know how many clusters are impacted as this information isn't submitted via Telemetry/Insights. However if we see more customer cases we might change our stance.
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 (OpenShift Container Platform 4.7.18 bug fix update), 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-2021:2502
verified in "4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest" ci image. With the patch revert in place, the unformatted hostnames are now accepted and functional: ------- oc get clusterversion NAME VERSION AVAILABLE PROGRESSING SINCE STATUS version 4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest True False 10m Cluster version is 4.7.0-0.ci.test-2021-06-02-033128-ci-ln-rv5lck2-latest oc get svc NAME TYPE CLUSTER-IP EXTERNAL-IP PORT(S) AGE service/service-secure ClusterIP 172.30.209.51 <none> 27443/TCP 7s service/service-unsecure ClusterIP 172.30.60.116 <none> 27017/TCP 6s oc expose svc service-unsecure --hostname=foobar route.route.openshift.io/service-unsecure exposed oc get route service-unsecure -o yaml apiVersion: route.openshift.io/v1 kind: Route metadata: creationTimestamp: "2021-06-02T04:17:38Z" labels: name: service-unsecure name: service-unsecure namespace: test1a resourceVersion: "32749" uid: 1db916cd-722e-456b-ac89-55331183bed2 spec: host: foobar port: targetPort: http to: kind: Service name: service-unsecure weight: 100 wildcardPolicy: None status: ingress: - conditions: - lastTransitionTime: "2021-06-02T04:17:39Z" status: "True" type: Admitted host: foobar routerCanonicalHostname: apps.ci-ln-rv5lck2-f76d1.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.openshift.com routerName: default wildcardPolicy: None -------