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.

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

Fix a bug in kubelet hostport logic which flushes KUBE-MARK-MASQ iptables chain #32413

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 9, 2016

Conversation

freehan
Copy link
Contributor

@freehan freehan commented Sep 9, 2016

Fixes #32415

This change is Reviewable

@freehan freehan added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. cherrypick-candidate labels Sep 9, 2016
@freehan freehan added this to the v1.4 milestone Sep 9, 2016
@thockin thockin added priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. labels Sep 9, 2016
@thockin thockin changed the title fix a bug in hostport where it flushes KUBE-MARK-MASQ chain Fix a bug in kubelet hostport logic which flushes KUBE-MARK-MASQ iptables chain Sep 9, 2016
@thockin thockin removed the priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. label Sep 9, 2016
@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 9, 2016
@thockin
Copy link
Member

thockin commented Sep 9, 2016

at line 291 we also reference iptablesproxy.KubeMarkMasqChain - can you open a bug to create a new package under kubelet that exposes those constants? I don't like the cross-reference.

@thockin thockin added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 9, 2016
@freehan
Copy link
Contributor Author

freehan commented Sep 9, 2016

Sure. will do

@pwittrock pwittrock added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Sep 9, 2016
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

fabioy added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2016
…3-upstream-release-1.3

Automated cherry pick of #32413
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 9, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 118ebd5.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit e43f605 into kubernetes:master Sep 9, 2016
k8s-github-robot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2016
…32413-#32424-#32404-#32163-upstream-release-1.4

Automatic merge from submit-queue

Automated cherry pick of #31990 #32413 #32424 #32404 #32163

Cherry pick of #31990 #32413 #32424 #32404 #32163 on release-1.4.

Batch 8
@k8s-cherrypick-bot
Copy link

Commit found in the "release-1.4" branch appears to be this PR. Removing the "cherrypick-candidate" label. If this is an error find help to get your PR picked.

shyamjvs pushed a commit to shyamjvs/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2016
shyamjvs pushed a commit to shyamjvs/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2016
…k-of-#32413-upstream-release-1.3

Automated cherry pick of kubernetes#32413
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants