/area ipv6

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: danehans
We suggest the following additional approver: yujuhong

Assign the PR to them by writing /assign @yujuhong in a comment when ready.

Associated issue: 46712

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

Instead of creating multiple kubelet in one test function, why not adding another wrapper function so that the test can use a different, custom, kubelet it it wishes? Or is the intention to run all tests on all kind of kubelets eventually?

@yujuhong thank you for reviewing my PR. My intention is to run all tests on multiple types of kubelets, starting with IPv4 and IPv6-based kubelets and eventually a dual-stack kubelet. This approach a) helps minimize regressions while adding IPv6 support and b) builds a foundation for additional concurrent, custom kubelet testing. However, I will follow your guidance if you feel a different approach is necessary. Please advise.

My intention is to run all tests on multiple types of kubelets, starting with IPv4 and IPv6-based kubelets and eventually a dual-stack kubelet.

Can you narrow down the code that'd be affected and tested? I don't expect changes like this to affect all unit tests in the package. Running all tests multiple times seem like a waste of resources...

@yujuhong I can narrow down the code and only update tests with a second, IPv6-only Kubelet for tests with ties to the hostname, nodeName or host IP. With that said, this PR does not implement the second, IPv6-only Kubelet.

My intention is to submit a follow-on PR that adds the IPv6-only Kubelet and I will only update tests with ties to the Kubelet hostname, nodeName or host IP. I did not want to update tests with the second, IPv6-only Kubelet if you found this approach unacceptable. With this understanding, do you find the approach this PR takes acceptable?

/test pull-kubernetes-unit

/test pull-kubernetes-federation-e2e-gce

@danehans PR needs rebase

@yujuhong sig-network is planning to add IPv6 support for the 1.9 release. It would be nice to have IPv6 Kubelet test coverage in the release. I updated this PR in June based on your feedback. If I rebase the PR to address conflicts, will it be accepted? Just trying to avoid having to continually rebase :-)

I still find creating multiple kubelets for every test and specifying an index inside the test tedious, unclear, and error-prone.
Could you create a newTestIPv6Kubelet() and only call it for the tests that need IPv6? It'd also be great to have the second commit that include the tests you want to add/change.

@yujuhong sounds like a plan. I'll get to work on it.

This PR hasn't been active in 61 days. It will be closed in 28 days (Dec 28, 2017).

cc @danehans @yujuhong

You can add 'keep-open' label to prevent this from happening, or add a comment to keep it open another 90 days

@danehans are you still working on the PR?

@yujuhong I am not. I will close the PR.