I tried to follow a principle of encapsulation here - we can still default to
peeps making connections to 80/443 on a Service object, but internally we will
use 8080/8443.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Keesler <akeesler@vmware.com>
- TLS certificates can be configured on the OIDCProviderConfig using
the `secretName` field.
- When listening for incoming TLS connections, choose the TLS cert
based on the SNI hostname of the incoming request.
- Because SNI hostname information on incoming requests does not include
the port number of the request, we add a validation that
OIDCProviderConfigs where the issuer hostnames (not including port
number) are the same must use the same `secretName`.
- Note that this approach does not yet support requests made to an
IP address instead of a hostname. Also note that `localhost` is
considered a hostname by SNI.
- Add port 443 as a container port to the pod spec.
- A new controller watches for TLS secrets and caches them in memory.
That same in-memory cache is used while servicing incoming connections
on the TLS port.
- Make it easy to configure both port 443 and/or port 80 for various
Service types using our ytt templates for the supervisor.
- When deploying to kind, add another nodeport and forward it to the
host on another port to expose our new HTTPS supervisor port to the
host.
- When two different Issuers have the same host (i.e. they differ
only by path) then they must have the same secretName. This is because
it wouldn't make sense for there to be two different TLS certificates
for one host. Find any that do not have the same secret name to
put an error status on them and to avoid serving OIDC endpoints for
them. The host comparison is case-insensitive.
- Issuer hostnames should be treated as case-insensitive, because
DNS hostnames are case-insensitive. So https://me.com and
https://mE.cOm are duplicate issuers. However, paths are
case-sensitive, so https://me.com/A and https://me.com/a are
different issuers. Fixed this in the issuer validations and in the
OIDC Manager's request router logic.
When using kind we forward the node's port to the host, so we only
really care about the `nodePort` value. For acceptance clusters,
we put an Ingress in front of a NodePort Service, so we only really
care about the `port` value.
Based on our experiences today with GKE, it will be easier for our users
to configure Ingress health checks if the healthz endpoint is available
on the same public port as the OIDC endpoints.
Also add an integration test for the healthz endpoint now that it is
public.
Also add the optional `containers[].ports.containerPort` to the
supervisor Deployment because the GKE docs say that GKE will look
at that field while inferring how to invoke the health endpoint. See
https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/ingress#def_inf_hc
- New optional ytt value called `into_namespace` means install into that
preexisting namespace rather than creating a new namespace for each app
- Also ensure that every resource that is created statically by our yaml
at install-time by either app is labeled consistently
- Also support adding custom labels to all of those resources from a
new ytt value called `custom_labels`
Add install-pinniped-supervisor.yaml and rename install-pinniped.yaml
to install-pinniped-concierge.yaml in the release process and
installation/demo documentation.
- Tiltfile and prepare-for-integration-tests.sh both specify the
NodePort Service using `--data-value-yaml 'service_nodeport_port=31234'`
- Also rename the namespaces used by the Concierge and Supervisor apps
during integration tests running locally
