Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

add blog for feature ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange #40204

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 12, 2023
Merged

add blog for feature ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange #40204

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 12, 2023

Conversation

xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor

@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun commented Mar 22, 2023 •
edited
Loading

add blog for KEP 3668 kubernetes/enhancements#3668

this blog describes the behavior of the new Feature ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange, and the problems it solves, and shows some examples

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the 1.27 milestone Mar 22, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. area/blog Issues or PRs related to the Kubernetes Blog subproject labels Mar 22, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added language/en Issues or PRs related to English language sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs. labels Mar 22, 2023
@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2023
Merged
@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun changed the title add blog document for feature ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange add blog for feature ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange Mar 22, 2023
@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2023
Closed
16 tasks
@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun force-pushed the blog branch 2 times, most recently from 4041c5b to 3eb86f1 Compare March 22, 2023 08:32
tengqm
tengqm reviewed Apr 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Apr 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 68af9d7
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/64338777450b930008a5a64a

@xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tengqm thank you so much, It's all fixed.

tengqm
tengqm reviewed Apr 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated
Comment on lines 85 to 89
service-node-port-range: 30000-32767
Band Offset: `min(max(16, 2768/32), 128)` = `min(max(16, 86), 128)` = `min(86, 128)` = 86
Static band start: 30000
Static band end: 30085
Range end: 32767
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the output would be good for these lines.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would it be better to change them to tables?

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 3, 2023

@xuzhenglun There are still quite a few nits you didn't respond to.

@xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor Author

xuzhenglun commented Apr 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@tengqm Thanks for the correction, sorry, I think they should all be changed now.

sftim
sftim reviewed Apr 4, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@sftim sftim left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/hold
pending assignment of publication date

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Apr 4, 2023
@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 5, 2023

/lgtm

@harshitasao
Copy link
Contributor

Hello, Comms Lead for v1.27 here. The publication order and date for the Feature Blog series has been finalized and the tracking board is updated.

The publication date for this article is 11-05-2023 (May 11).

Thank you!

@mickeyboxell mickeyboxell removed this from the 1.27 milestone Apr 11, 2023
tengqm
tengqm reviewed Apr 12, 2023
View reviewed changes
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-03-08-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md Outdated
---
layout: blog
title: "Kubernetes 1.27: Avoid Collisions Assigning Ports to NodePort Services"
date: 2023-04-10
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please change this date and the filename according to the suggestion.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks, it's done

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

/hold cancel
Cancelling hold because the date and filename is correct.
/approve
Approved from docs side.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Apr 12, 2023
@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

/hold cancel
Cancelling hold because the date and filename is correct.
/approve
Approved from docs side.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tengqm

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tengqm
please allow me to ask few more question.

Is there anything else I need to do next? Does the lgtm label need to wait until it is released in May?

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

@tengqm please allow me to ask few more question.

Is there anything else I need to do next? Does the lgtm label need to wait until it is released in May?

No. I omitted lgtm because I believe this is a work large enough to warrant another pair of eyes, preferably from someone who can give it a tech review, although this one doesn't seem a strong need for tech review.

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

@xuzhenglun You have to rename the file according to the release date assigned.

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

/hold
again for filename change.
Feel free to lift the hold when it is corrected.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Apr 12, 2023
@xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tengqm

No. I omitted lgtm because I believe this is a work large enough to warrant another pair of eyes, preferably from someone who can give it a tech review, although this one doesn't seem a strong need for tech review.

Really thanks for your explanation patiently.

You have to rename the file according to the release date assigned.

The file name has been corrected.

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Apr 12, 2023

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Apr 12, 2023
@aojea
Copy link
Member

aojea commented Apr 12, 2023

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 12, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: c096c74e85a291e602e4afebfac97f8fc020f118

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 7dd8ab2 into kubernetes:main Apr 12, 2023
aojea
aojea reviewed Apr 12, 2023
View reviewed changes
content/en/blog/_posts/2023-05-11-nodeport-dynamic-and-static-allocation.md
## How can you avoid NodePort Service port conflicts?
Kubernetes 1.24 introduced changes for `type: ClusterIP` Services, dividing the CIDR range for cluster
IP addresses into two blocks that use different allocation policies to [reduce the risk of conflicts](/docs/reference/networking/virtual-ips/#avoiding-collisions).
In Kubernetes 1.27, as an alpha feature, you can adopt a similar policy for `type: NodePort` Servies.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
In Kubernetes 1.27, as an alpha feature, you can adopt a similar policy for `type: NodePort` Servies.
In Kubernetes 1.27, as an alpha feature, you can adopt a similar policy for `type: NodePort` Services.

@aojea
Copy link
Member

aojea commented Apr 12, 2023

ups, I noticed there is a typo https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/40204/files#r1163933056 , @xuzhenglun can you please follow up on that?

@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun deleted the blog branch April 12, 2023 11:10
@xuzhenglun xuzhenglun mentioned this pull request Apr 12, 2023
Merged
@xuzhenglun
Copy link
Contributor Author

ops, thank you for your careful review. The PR has been submitted in #40635.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tengqm tengqm tengqm left review comments

@aojea aojea aojea left review comments

@sftim sftim sftim left review comments

@nate-double-u nate-double-u Awaiting requested review from nate-double-u

Assignees

@tengqm tengqm

@aojea aojea

@sftim sftim

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/blog Issues or PRs related to the Kubernetes Blog subproject cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. language/en Issues or PRs related to English language lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@xuzhenglun @tengqm @harshitasao @k8s-ci-robot @aojea @sftim @mickeyboxell