Ryan Baxter

Yes I dont see any either, that is an issue in itself for sure, but to me it sounded like you could not get it to work, is it working...

> Check this line [out](https://github.com/spring-cloud/spring-cloud-config/pull/1628/files#diff-c65401103fbee73d9c23aceb4e8a996ac83bf24cba8cdd816668b8fb1e17a0d4R26). I feel it is bit misleading. I dont think its misleasing, that is the prefix for the properties. The profile to be enabled is specified...

Have you tried using the endpoints specifically for liveliness and readiness from spring boot? https://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/current/reference/html/actuator.html#actuator.endpoints.kubernetes-probes

Are you using `spring.config.import` to specify the config server as a configuration source?

Could you try using bootstrap instead and see if it makes a difference? https://docs.spring.io/spring-cloud-config/docs/current/reference/html/#config-first-bootstrap

Can you provide a [complete, minimal, verifiable sample](https://stackoverflow.com/help/mcve) that reproduces the problem? It should be available as a GitHub (or similar) project or attached to this issue as a zip...

Sure I don't have any strong objection

Are you suggesting we don't print the warning?

@spencergibb I have been thinking more about this recently...wondering what you thought of this ``` spring: application: name: gateway cloud: gateway: routes: - id: greeting uri: http://greeting predicates: ..... filters:...

I have been working on prototyping this, stay tuned for more updates as I play around with things.