We don't need to parse out the counter values from the iptables-save
output (since they are always 0 for the chains we care about). Just
parse the chain names themselves.
Also, all of the callers of GetChainLines() pass it input that
contains only a single table, so just assume that, rather than
carefully parsing only a single table's worth of the input.
The test was calling GetChainLines() on invalid pseudo-iptables-save
output where most of the lines were indented. GetChainLines() happened
to still parse this "correctly", but it would be better to be testing
it on actually-correct data.
The iptables and ipvs proxies have code to try to preserve certain
iptables counters when modifying chains via iptables-restore, but the
counters in question only actually exist for the built-in chains (eg
INPUT, FORWARD, PREROUTING, etc), which we never modify via
iptables-restore (and in fact, *can't* safely modify via
iptables-restore), so we are really just doing a lot of unnecessary
work to copy the constant string "[0:0]" over from iptables-save
output to iptables-restore input. So stop doing that.
Also fix a confused error message when iptables-save fails.
- `cert-dir` could be specified to a value other than the default value
- we have tests that should be executed successfully on the working cluster
Signed-off-by: Dave Chen <dave.chen@arm.com>
Before:
findDisk()
fcPathExp := "^(pci-.*-fc|fc)-0x" + wwn + "-lun-" + lun
After:
findDisk()
fcPathExp := "^(pci-.*-fc|fc)-0x" + wwn + "-lun-" + lun + "$"
fc path may have the same wwns but different luns.for example:
pci-0000:41:00.0-fc-0x500a0981891b8dc5-lun-1
pci-0000:41:00.0-fc-0x500a0981891b8dc5-lun-12
Function findDisk() may mismatch the fc path, return the wrong device and wrong associated devicemapper parent.
This may cause a disater that pods attach wrong disks. Accutally it happended in my testing environment before.
The ipvs proxier was figuring out LoadBalancerSourceRanges matches in
the nat table and using KUBE-MARK-DROP to mark unmatched packets to be
dropped later. But with ipvs, unlike with iptables, DNAT happens after
the packet is "delivered" to the dummy interface, so the packet will
still be unmodified when it reaches the filter table (the first time)
so there's no reason to split the work between the nat and filter
tables; we can just do it all from the filter table and call DROP
directly.
Before:
- KUBE-LOAD-BALANCER (in nat) uses kubeLoadBalancerFWSet to match LB
traffic for services using LoadBalancerSourceRanges, and sends it
to KUBE-FIREWALL.
- KUBE-FIREWALL uses kubeLoadBalancerSourceCIDRSet and
kubeLoadBalancerSourceIPSet to match allowed source/dest combos
and calls "-j RETURN".
- All remaining traffic that doesn't escape KUBE-FIREWALL is sent to
KUBE-MARK-DROP.
- Traffic sent to KUBE-MARK-DROP later gets dropped by chains in
filter created by kubelet.
After:
- All INPUT and FORWARD traffic gets routed to KUBE-PROXY-FIREWALL
(in filter). (We don't use "KUBE-FIREWALL" any more because
there's already a chain in filter by that name that belongs to
kubelet.)
- KUBE-PROXY-FIREWALL sends traffic matching kubeLoadbalancerFWSet
to KUBE-SOURCE-RANGES-FIREWALL
- KUBE-SOURCE-RANGES-FIREWALL uses kubeLoadBalancerSourceCIDRSet and
kubeLoadBalancerSourceIPSet to match allowed source/dest combos
and calls "-j RETURN".
- All remaining traffic that doesn't escape
KUBE-SOURCE-RANGES-FIREWALL is dropped (directly via "-j DROP").
- (KUBE-LOAD-BALANCER in nat is now used only to set up masquerading)
When a Pod is referencing a Node that doesn't exist on the local
informer cache, the current behavior was to return an error to
retry later and stop processing.
However, this can cause scenarios that a missing node leaves a
Slice stuck, it can no reflect other changes, or be created.
Also, this doesn't respect the publishNotReadyAddresses options
on Services, that considers ok to publish pod Addresses that are
known to not be ready.
The new behavior keeps retrying the problematic Service, but it
keeps processing the updates, reflacting current state on the
EndpointSlice. If the publishNotReadyAddresses is set, a missing
node on a Pod is not treated as an error.
There is always a placeholder slice.
The ServicePortCache logic was considering always one endpointSlice
per Endpoint, but if there are multiple empty Endpoints, we just
use one placeholder slice, not multiple placeholder slices.
