Closed frzifus closed 1 month ago
cc @jaronoff97 @pavolloffay @swiatekm
$POD_IP
makes more sense than 0:0:0:0
but I don't know if there is a big difference for deployment/SS pods, but maybe it matters more in e.g. daemonset .
For services running in kubernetes, the norm is to bind to the 0 address. Binding to pod_ip may be slightly more secure since it is a smaller surface area, but it could result in unexpected behavior, such as when using kubectl port-forward
. As a user I would prefer binding to the 0 address by default for convention / convenience.
Something you want to work on @led0nk? :)
Yes, please
Does it make sense to hide this behaviour behind a feature gate on the operator that we enable once we disable the component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
feature gate on the collector?
cc @pavolloffay @swiatekm @jaronoff97
would this featuregate be enabled by default and eventually removed?
It should be enabled by default once component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
is removed on the collector side.
Component(s)
collector
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The 0.104.0 collector release enables
component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
by default. Since this would be a breaking change for the users, the operator in 0.104.0 reverts this change by updating fields like:4317
or empty fields to0.0.0.0:4317
.Describe the solution you'd like
Maybe it does make sense to use the collector default
localhost
in sidecar scenarios and the$POD_IP
for all the other modes.Update
Add upgrade routine and default webhook entry for the following components(source https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector/issues/8510#issuecomment-1735292387):
[x] healtcheck extension
Next:
component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
feature-gate.[ ] Remove
component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
from defaulting webhookDescribe alternatives you've considered
Keep it like it is today or disable the
component.UseLocalHostAsDefaultHost
featuregate. (Which will be removed in the future).Additional context
https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-operator/pull/3119#discussion_r1674716212