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

Add zonal affinity support #2815

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

08volt
Copy link
Contributor

@08volt 08volt commented Feb 26, 2025

Overview

This PR implements zonal affinity capabilities for L4 Internal Load Balancers, allowing traffic to stay within zones when possible for improved performance and reduced cross-zone data transfer costs.

Changes

  • Add zonal affinity flag for L4 ILB controllers
  • Implement backendService zonal affinity control logic
  • Add backendService minimum API version control for zonal features
  • Update backendService tests to include zonal affinity cases with expected NetworkPassThroughLbTrafficPolicy
  • Add handler for service spec Spec.TrafficDistribution change events
  • Add L4 TestZonalAffinity integration tests

Usage

Users can enable zonal affinity by configuring their service with Spec.TrafficDistribution=PreferClose.

Testing

  • Added unit tests for backendService with zonal affinity configurations
  • Added L4 TestZonalAffinity integration tests to verify controller functionality

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Feb 26, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from aojea February 26, 2025 12:14
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 08volt
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign aojea for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @08volt. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 26, 2025
@08volt 08volt force-pushed the zon-aff-traf-dist branch 2 times, most recently from 123a085 to 9caa2e9 Compare February 26, 2025 12:20
This commit implements zonal affinity capabilities for L4 Internal Load Balancers:

- Add zonal affinity flag for L4 ILB controllers
- Implement backendService zonal affinity control logic
- Add backendService minimum API version control
- Update backendService tests to include zonal affinity cases with expected NetworkPassThroughLbTrafficPolicy
- Add handler for service spec Spec.TrafficDistribution change events
- Add L4 TestZonalAffinity integration tests
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants