iPerf: resolve ipv6 client pod deployment issue with a name format

[elenagerman]

Description

When the ipv6 address is used for traffic generation, and this is the only ip version defined for the server: item.status.podIP getting ipv6 ip format value, "podIP": "fd01:0:0:6::bd" as an example As a result, the client pod failed to start because of the name format failure; only '.' and '_' are acceptable in a name string (not ':').

Fixes

remove item.status.podIP variable from the name definition

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #812 (1be41bc) into master (0954437) will increase coverage by 0.30%. The diff coverage is n/a.

:exclamation: Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #812      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.17%   53.47%   +0.30%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines         331      331              
==========================================
+ Hits          176      177       +1     
+ Misses        155      154       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
gha	53.47% <ø> (+0.30%)	:arrow_up:
python-3.9	53.47% <ø> (+0.30%)	:arrow_up:
unit	53.47% <ø> (+0.30%)	:arrow_up:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[stale[bot]]

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

[elenagerman]

it is still relevant; the problem exists for single ipv6 openshift deployments and in case the openshift priority on ipv4 will change to the ipv6

[stale[bot]]

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.