-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 509
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
conformance: Coverage for request routing to TLSRoute with no valid BackendRefs #2153
Comments
Sounds like a reasonable improvement. /triage accepted Given that this is about /priority backlog |
This issue has not been updated in over 1 year, and should be re-triaged. You can:
For more details on the triage process, see https://www.kubernetes.dev/docs/guide/issue-triage/ /remove-triage accepted |
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues. This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle stale |
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues. This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle rotten |
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:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /close not-planned |
@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned". In response to this:
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. |
What would you like to be added:
As a follow up to #2076, we should add test coverage to the TLSRoute test in that PR that makes an assertion on what a client sees when making a connection/request that match a Gateway/TLSRoute with no valid backends (due to invalid ReferenceGrant etc.)
Before we add a test, the language here likely needs a little more specificity (and we should make sure to write tests that match the new language), particularly what "reject" means:
gateway-api/apis/v1alpha2/tlsroute_types.go
Lines 104 to 108 in a5ede12
"Reject" could mean:
Why this is needed:
Full coverage of TLSRoute API surface.
Related to #1579
We can probably do something similar for TCPRoute
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: