-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
docs: add design for adding new arguments for TLS #173
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | ||
# Add support for TLS certificates for CSI Addons communication | ||
|
||
The Kubernetes CSI Addons project currently connects the CSI Addons Manager to the add-on sidecar without TLS in place. | ||
We propose a introduction of an arugment which enabled should mount the TLS certificates into the sidecar container. | ||
The operator is only responsible for propagation of the certificates. | ||
|
||
## Problem Statement | ||
|
||
CSI addons sidecar which is being deployed here needs certificates. Currently we have no argument to enable this propagation of certificates. | ||
|
||
## Proposed Solution | ||
|
||
### Introduce a new argument for TLS | ||
|
||
We introduce a new argument in the commands to enable TLS. It is diabled by default. But if this is enabled the deployer is expected to have mounted a secret that contains the required certificates. We will essentially need a certifiate that is compatible with the hostname that the manager will be issuing network calls using it. | ||
|
||
|
||
### Operator changes | ||
|
||
The Ceph CSI Operator is only responsible for taking in the information mounted to it and project those as volumes in the CSI Addons sidecar. The deployer of CSI Addons should create these certificates and mount it at `/etc/tls/tls.crt` and `/etc/tls/tls.key`. We keep this hardcoded to reduce the number of new arguments introduced. The logger should provide enough information if the user is not mounting this correctly for easy debugging. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @bipuladh I am not sure I understand
Can you please elaborate or rephrase? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is not possible. I have updated the doc to reflect that client operator would pass the certificate using a secret. The locator for the secret will be added in a new field that I propose in the latest commit. |
||
|
||
## Guide to the deployeer for handling certificates | ||
|
||
Since we use host networking the certificates should have these IP addresses as valid Subject names. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please provide a code snippet that describes the desired outcome of this new field within the API you would like to augment.
The code snippet should be descriptive enough so the following will be clear: