NE-1530: IngressController LB Subnet Selection in AWS

[gcs278]

Allows users to specify subnets (i.e. Availability Zones) for IngressControllers using load balancers in AWS. Introduce
under the IngressControllerLBSubnetsAWS FeatureGate. Works for both CLB and NLBs.

Enhancement: openshift/enhancements#1595
Epic: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NE-705

[openshift-ci-robot]

@gcs278: This pull request references NE-705 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the epic to target either version "4.16." or "openshift-4.16.", but it targets "openshift-4.13" instead.

In response to this:

Allows users to specify subnets (i.e. Availability Zones) for IngressControllers in AWS. Introduce under the
AWSLoadBalancerSubnetSelection FeatureGate. Works for both CLB and NLBs.

Enhancement: openshift/enhancements#1595
RFE: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RFE-1717.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

Hello @gcs278! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@gcs278: This pull request references NE-1530 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Allows users to specify subnets (i.e. Availability Zones) for IngressControllers in AWS. Introduce under the
AWSLoadBalancerSubnetSelection FeatureGate. Works for both CLB and NLBs.

Enhancement: openshift/enhancements#1595
RFE: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RFE-1717.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@gcs278: This pull request references NE-1530 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Allows users to specify subnets (i.e. Availability Zones) for IngressControllers in AWS. Introduce under the
AWSLoadBalancerSubnetSelection FeatureGate. Works for both CLB and NLBs.

Enhancement: openshift/enhancements#1595
Epic: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NE-705

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@gcs278: This pull request references NE-1530 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Allows users to specify subnets (i.e. Availability Zones) for IngressControllers using load balancers in AWS. Introduce
under the IngressControllerLBSubnetsAWS FeatureGate. Works for both CLB and NLBs.

Enhancement: openshift/enhancements#1595
Epic: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NE-705

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[gcs278]

/hold
EP is still under review and it's likely we will add a ingresses.config.openshift.io.spec.loadBalancer.platform.aws.subnets field as well.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: candita, gcs278, JoelSpeed

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [JoelSpeed]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[openshift-ci]

@JoelSpeed: Overrode contexts on behalf of JoelSpeed: ci/prow/verify-crd-schema

In response to this:

/lgtm
/override ci/prow/verify-crd-schema

Ignoring existing failures being reported here, all SSA tags fixed so everything left is unfixable

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-sigs/prow repository.

[JoelSpeed]

/hold cancel
/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD ba11c15 and 2 for PR HEAD e745b00 in total

[gcs278]

/retest

[gcs278]

Cluster install failure and a seemingly unrelated test failure:
/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 16d44e6 and 1 for PR HEAD e745b00 in total

[gcs278]

Unrelated failure
/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD b01900f and 0 for PR HEAD e745b00 in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/hold

Revision e745b00 was retested 3 times: holding

[gcs278]

e2e-aws-serial-techpreview is permafailing now with:

[sig-api-machinery] API data in etcd should be stored at the correct location and version for all resources [Serial] [Suite:openshift/conformance/serial] expand_less	7s
{  fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/etcd/etcd_storage_path.go:534]: test failed:
no test data for resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Kind=ResourceClaimParameters.  Please add a test for your new type to etcdStorageData.
no test data for resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Kind=ResourceClassParameters.  Please add a test for your new type to etcdStorageData.
no test data for resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Kind=ResourceSlice.  Please add a test for your new type to etcdStorageData.
etcd data does not match the types we saw:
seen but not in etcd data:
[
	resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Resource=resourceclassparameters 
	resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Resource=resourceslices 
	resource.k8s.io/v1alpha2, Resource=resourceclaimparameters]
Ginkgo exit error 1: exit with code 1}

I see a bug was created https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-34666 and openshift/kubernetes#1984 is being tested as a fix.

[gcs278]

openshift/origin#28843 has merged. I believe this is intended to fix the techpreview e2e tests.
/hold cancel

/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD b01900f and 2 for PR HEAD e745b00 in total

[gcs278]

@JoelSpeed could I get you to override ci/prow/verify-crd-schema once again?

[JoelSpeed]

@gcs278 Has something happened? There seem to be numerous SSA tag failures, I thought we had cleared all of those? Did a commit get dropped in a rebase?

[gcs278]

@gcs278 Has something happened? There seem to be numerous SSA tag failures, I thought we had cleared all of those? Did a commit get dropped in a rebase?

I don't think anything changed since your first overrode, the errors are still the same. The SSA errors are from the same file I touched, but I didn't introduce them. Based on the output of the test, I thought overriding is acceptable:

This verifier checks all files that have changed. In some cases you may have changed or renamed a file that already contained api violations, but you are not introducing a new violation. In such cases it is appropriate to /override the failing CI job.

Do you want me to fix the existing SSA errors?

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD cefcda6 and 1 for PR HEAD e745b00 in total

[openshift-ci]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[openshift-ci]

@gcs278: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-azure	b3a97aa	link	false	/test e2e-azure
ci/prow/verify-crd-schema	b3a97aa	link	true	/test verify-crd-schema
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift	b3a97aa	link	true	/test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial-techpreview	b3a97aa	link	true	/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.