Skip to content

Conversation

jboxman
Copy link
Contributor

@jboxman jboxman commented Aug 21, 2019

  • OSDOCS-475

So this adds docs for the various CNI plug-ins that we support for creating additional networks.

@jboxman jboxman added this to the Future Release milestone Aug 21, 2019
@jboxman jboxman self-assigned this Aug 21, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 21, 2019
@jboxman jboxman changed the title Update content for multiple networks OSDOCS-475: Update content for multiple networks Aug 21, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 6, 2019
@jboxman jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-475 branch 3 times, most recently from 39ca0a9 to 4f572cd Compare September 13, 2019 21:02
@openshift-docs-preview-bot

The preview will be available shortly at:

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey Jason, if I'm reading this correct... Is this intended to be an overview for all IPAM plugins? I think this JSON block might be too broad to include for all IPAM plugins, unfortunately.

It's awesome for static, indeed! But, for other types... It's not always the same parameters.

For example, for DHCP, you only set type, for example:

{
  "type": "dhcp"
}

So while all of these parameters are perfect for the static IPAM CNI plugin-in, the DHCP CNI plug-in is not as feature rich, and doesn't have any additional parameters other than the required type field.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dougbtv, I think I understand what you're saying. I hadn't fully thought through the presentation of the configuration, then. I can think of a few possibilities:

  1. simply split the discussion into 2 sections, one for type=static and one for type=DHCP. The configuration for the former would include the various permissible parameters. Then configuration for the latter would simply specify type=DHCP and that no further configuration is possible.

  2. Specify for each parameter that it is only applicable to type=static. That will probably get redundant and may be less clear an approach than 1).

I'll have to consider how best to proceed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No worries -- I kinda of lean towards #1 to split into two sections, but, definitely defer to you on how it's presented

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd forgotten, I split this out for the YAML configuration, because there you can only provide the staticIPAMConfig if you are doing static assignment.

@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 17, 2019

Per Slack, I need to update this PR to properly reflect which plug-in is supported on which platform.

@jboxman jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-475 branch 2 times, most recently from 437463d to c0ad68d Compare September 17, 2019 21:05
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 17, 2019
@jboxman jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-475 branch 7 times, most recently from e7940f1 to 2333719 Compare September 18, 2019 23:33
@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 18, 2019

@dougbtv @weliang1

I updated the PR with your suggested changes.

Thanks!

@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 20, 2019

@dougbtv

The automated preview didn't update, so here are the latest rendered files:

@jboxman jboxman added the peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR label Sep 20, 2019
@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 20, 2019

@openshift/team-documentation PTAL? Thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

@kalexand-rh kalexand-rh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that some of your modules are confusing, that some of your assemblies need to be reorganized, and that you need to make some steps and assumptions clearer. I also have some style changes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See the comments on the similar module - you need more examples and to make it clearer how these yaml examples fit together.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You need an introduction statement.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is more of a placeholder for this PR (#16679) with updated content for SR-IOV in 4.2.

@kalexand-rh kalexand-rh added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR labels Sep 24, 2019
@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 24, 2019

@kalexand-rh thanks!

@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 24, 2019

Per @vikram-redhat, I'm going to merge this with the fixes I've completed, and then create a fix-up PR where I'll make the remaining structural changes and integrate any changes suggested from QE.

Jason Boxman 17:23
Would I want to merge it and create a fix-up PR for after or leave it?

Vikram Goyal 17:27
merge and create a fix up pr on monday - leave a note on it saying you have spoken to me about it

@jboxman jboxman merged commit f1821bd into openshift:master Sep 24, 2019
@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Sep 24, 2019

/cherrypick enterprise-4.2

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@jboxman: new pull request created: #16868

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-4.2

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/test-infra repository.

@jboxman jboxman deleted the OSDOCS-475 branch September 24, 2019 23:20
@jboxman
Copy link
Contributor Author

jboxman commented Oct 1, 2019

Created #16983 with updates.

@jboxman jboxman mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2019
jboxman added a commit to jboxman-rh/openshift-docs that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2019
openshift-cherrypick-robot pushed a commit to openshift-cherrypick-robot/openshift-docs that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
branch/enterprise-4.2 peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants