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

Ability to customize NodePort Range #629

Open
dexhorthy opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Ability to customize NodePort Range #629

dexhorthy opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@dexhorthy
Copy link
Member

Overview

Right now we override the default kubeadm NodePort range to 80-60000, but sometimes it would be nice to be able to customize this range in my kURL spec. E.G. something like

spec:
  kubernetes:
    nodePortRange: 80-62000

Use case

I've got an ActiveMQ that runs on a default port of 61616, and I'd like to keep it on the default port with a NodePort.

@MitchellJThomas
Copy link

Yes, thank you @dexhorthy for adding that for us (Tripwire).

@marccampbell
Copy link
Member

@dexhorthy @MitchellJThomas one thing to consider here: using non-standard node port ranges will prevent a kURL installer from being a "CNCF certified installer". We've been working on submitting kURL to the CNCF as a "certified kubernetes installer" (https://www.cncf.io/certification/software-conformance/) and node port range is the last issue to resolve. We've recently introduced an optional flag to use the standard node port range for an installer in #614 as we work towards compliance.

It's not possible to have a certified Kubernetes distribution that uses a non-standard nodeport range.

This issue is a reasonable request, but I want to make sure that the conformance test issue is considered here. Using "standard" node ports will allow you to have a "certified kubernetes installer", if this is important for your distribution.

@camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @dexhorthy,

This one is open for a long period. Do you think that still required? Should we keep this one open?

Thank you for your attention.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants