Nodeport alternative for RTCD configuration #7928
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
Hello @jthunderbird, Thanks for your pull request! A Core Committer will review your pull request soon. For code contributions, you can learn more about the review process here. |
Contributor
|
This PR has been automatically labelled "stale" because it hasn't had recent activity. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This is in conjunction with this change to the mattermost-rtcd helm chart.
By default, mattermost-rtcd requires both a headless service (not a huge deal) and host network access to the Kubernetes nodes (yes a huge deal). These PRs basically just adds an option to expose the UDP
rtcdendpoint via a NodePort instead of giving direct network level access to all rtcd pods and ports.Also a note on the ability to put all of your nodes behind a load balancer for more protection for your kubernetes cluster nodes.
Ticket Link
No ticket