Skip to content

Conversation

@upodroid
Copy link
Member

@upodroid upodroid commented Oct 20, 2025

Related to #17680

We are using private topology with scale jobs and the control plane instances configured public IP addresses so we cann SSH to the instances. However, we are not applying the public inbound SSH rule because if a bastion is enabled, it assumes you will always connect to the instances using the bastion which is false in clusterloader2 and ssh-external-to-master rules are missing.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 20, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign hakman 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 k8s-ci-robot added the area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider label Oct 20, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from zetaab October 20, 2025 19:58
@upodroid upodroid changed the title configure public SSH rules when using bastions gce: configure public SSH rules when using bastions Oct 20, 2025
@upodroid
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @hakman

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from hakman October 22, 2025 10:40
if err != nil {
return err
}
b.AddFirewallRulesTasks(c, "ssh-external-to-master", &gcetasks.FirewallRule{
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So we are creating tasks with the same name in two places, which is normally a sign that we can tweak the if statement to avoid duplication.

But ... I think the same comment as the other PR. This looks like it affects everyone, not just the scalability test. Can we introduce it behind a feature flag or simialr?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I changed the logic to remove the duplication of rules.

It's fair to assume:

  1. Spec.SSHAccess has a value and reaching the masters/nodes from that address isn't an issue
  2. If you are using a bastion and the instances don't have a public IP, the rule sits there doing nothing

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 27, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants