Add TLS docs
Added a document with an overview of our server TLS settings for each pod.
@rubenvp8510 is this doc accurate?
Also, a few questions:
- Should the gateway use the certificate and CA of
spec.template.distributor.tlsif configured?- if the gateway is enabled and
spec.template.distributor.tlsis configured, will it break gateway -> distributor connections?
- if the gateway is enabled and
- Currently there is no way to configure TLS for the gateway on non-OpenShift clusters?
- Should the TLS config be more flexible? allow choosing between
-
internal(self-signed by the operator) -
serving-ca(generated by OpenShift)? -
custom(ConfigMap and Secret)
-
Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 75.35%. Comparing base (
83b6a17) to head (8f0d5a3).
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #813 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 75.35% 75.35%
=======================================
Files 89 89
Lines 6383 6383
=======================================
Hits 4810 4810
Misses 1343 1343
Partials 230 230
| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| unittests | 75.35% <ø> (ø) |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Added a document with an overview of our server TLS settings for each pod.
@rubenvp8510 is this doc accurate?
Also, a few questions:
* Should the gateway use the certificate and CA of `spec.template.distributor.tls` if configured? * if the gateway is enabled and `spec.template.distributor.tls` is configured, will it break gateway -> distributor connections?
I remember we prevent this when we generate the cofniguration, if the gateway is enabled TLS configuration is ignored., actually I think it will generate a bad configuration. https://github.com/grafana/tempo-operator/blob/main/internal/manifests/config/tempo-config.yaml#L12 I'll test today afternoon. I think if that is the case we need to add some validations to the webhook.
* Currently there is no way to configure TLS for the gateway on non-OpenShift clusters?
It seems is not :/
* Should the TLS config be more flexible? allow choosing between * `internal` (self-signed by the operator) * `serving-ca` ([generated by OpenShift](https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.14/security/certificates/service-serving-certificate.html))? * `custom` (ConfigMap and Secret)
I think yes, in the case of self-signed vs custom, you can control this using the feature flags, wondering if we need to control this better on the CRD.