Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

first draft of rate limit API #2028

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

first draft of rate limit API #2028

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e3bb3e7
first draft
kyessenov Jun 17, 2021
9eec267
typo
kyessenov Jun 17, 2021
3a8c3c6
slim down
kyessenov Jun 18, 2021
03ebefa
slim down
kyessenov Jun 18, 2021
e9aa076
review
kyessenov Jun 18, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion gen.sh
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ buf generate \
--path analysis \
--path authentication \
--path meta \
--path telemetry
--path telemetry \
--path policy
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe a bit of a nitpick but do we want a new group? "policy" feels very abstract - everything is policy. Maybe we should just it in the networking group?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 - we already had security use broad 'policy', let's keep it in networking ( it's not telemetry ).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Everything is networking in istio. I don't like policy either, but please not networking. Open to suggestions.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not aware of any good reason to not be in networking. It's not about like or not like here - it's not security nor telemetry, and I don't think we're planning to create a 'rate limiting' WG or API group.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I stated one good reason - this is not a universal rate limiting API. This is addressing a specific need for Istio users who do not want to use EnvoyFilters. It is not a core networking API.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if we're rate limiting the use of features on the network I'd be inclined to keep it in networking


# These folders do not have the full plugins used, as they are not full CRDs.
# We pass them a custom configuration to exclude the non-required files
Expand Down
270 changes: 270 additions & 0 deletions kubernetes/customresourcedefinitions.gen.yaml
View file
Open in desktop

Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.

Loading