Conformance Tests: L7 Gateways

[robscott]

This issue is intended to track conformance test development for L7 Gateways. Comment below if you're interested in working on covering any of these areas.

Core Capabilities:

• [x] Gateway - Route Binding
  • [x] Successful cross namespace configuration
  • [x] Invalid cross namespace configuration
  • [x] Invalid binding from Route kind not specified in AllowedRoutes.Kinds (@skriss)
• [x] Hostname matching (@skriss)
  • [x] Multiple listeners specifying different hostnames and same port, forwarding to different Routes
  • [x] Single listener specifying hostname that intersects with one of several hostnames specified on a Route
  • [x] Single listener specifying hostname that intersects with none of several hostnames specified on a Route
• [ ] TLS Certificates (Prior art in https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/ingress-controller-conformance that can be a starting point) - tracked in #1330

Extended Capabilities:

• [ ] Addresses (Note: This currently is listed as having core support, but Extended seems more accurate here)
  • [ ] Specify 1 address
  • [ ] Specify multiple addresses

[skriss]

I'm interested in picking up some of these - can start with the remaining route binding one and the hostname matching ones. @robscott were you thinking that the Gateway manifests for these would go into the individual tests, rather than the "base" manifests, since these aren't likely to be reused across many tests?

[robscott]

@skriss that's a great question. I think it will be most straightforward to start with Gateways being defined by the tests directly. We'll need to discuss more broadly though, maybe at the next community meeting. I think some implementations don't support automatically provisioning Gateways yet, so depending on how widespread that is, we may need to move Gateway definitions into base manifests. I'm thinking it should be easy to change where Gateways are defined after the tests are written though.

[robscott]

@skriss are there any specific tests from this list you want to start on?

[skriss]

@skriss are there any specific tests from this list you want to start on?

I'll start working on the "invalid binding due to route kind not allowed" plus all of the hostname matching ones you listed above

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue with /reopen
• Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close not-planned

[k8s-ci-robot]

@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned".

In response to this:

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue with /reopen
• Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close not-planned

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[robscott]

/reopen

[k8s-ci-robot]

@robscott: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[robscott]

/remove-lifecycle rotten

[dprotaso]

/lifecycle frozen

[shaneutt]

At this point the remaining items are broken off as separate issues, so we're good to close this.