Removing the last Alias IP Range from a Network interface fails

[sschols]

When trying to remove an Alias IP range from a network interface, it fails when removing the last alias IP range. The operation itself finishes successfully, but the alias ip range is still there.

It seems like when emptying the alias_ip_range property, protobuffer does not send it along the request at all, making the "backend" think it's not supposed to change the alias_ip_range property it all. But I could not find a way to avoid this behavior.

Environment details

• OS type and version: AlmaLinux 8.8
• Python version: python --version -> Python 3.9.16
• pip version: pip --version -> pip 23.3.1
• google-cloud-compute version: pip show google-cloud-compute -> 1.14.1

Steps to reproduce

1. Add an Alias IP range to a instance/network interface
2. Get the instance via Python SDK, remove all entries from the alias_ip_range list in the network interface
3. Submit the changed nic via a UpdateNetworkInterfaceInstanceRequest

Code example

nic.alias_ip_ranges = [a for a in alias_ips if not a.ip_cidr_range == f"{args.address}/32"]

request = compute_v1.UpdateNetworkInterfaceInstanceRequest(
    instance=instance.name,
    network_interface=nic.name,
    project=project_id,
    network_interface_resource = nic,
    zone=vm["availability_zone"]
)

operation = client.update_network_interface(request=request)

wait_for_extended_operation(operation, "IP address removal")

Stack trace

Making sure to follow these steps will guarantee the quickest resolution possible.

Thanks!

[parthea]

I believe this is related to a limitation in protobuf: Similar to proto2 APIs, proto3 does not track presence explicitly for repeated fields. : https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/main/docs/field_presence.md

Assigning to @vchudnov-g who is investigating solutions for a similar issue. (Googlers see b/223609100)

[sschols]

It's been a while, do you have any updates or potential workarounds on this?

[vchudnov-g]

We don't have any updates yet; we're still investigating a good solution/workaround for this. We will update this issue as we progress.

[B16CS006]

Is there any work around using this library itself?