label nodes with the name of the autoscaling group they belong to (if they belong to one)
tkellen opened this issue · 24 comments
What would you like to be added:
It would be extremely helpful for operators if nodes were labelled with the autoscaling group they belong to (if there is an autoscaling group associated with a given node). I think node.kubernetes.io/auto-scaling-group-name would be appropriate for this.
Why is this needed:
Alleviate the need to cross-reference autoscaling group instances in AWS with node names in kubectl.
I would be happy to submit a PR if this would be considered for acceptance. Let me know!
/kind feature
This issue is currently awaiting triage.
If cloud-provider-aws contributors determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.
The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.
I don't think this is unreasonable as long as we don't need to add any additional API calls, and it looks like aws:autoscaling:groupName is set on the instances by ASG, so we can just read the tag and apply the label with no additional calls. Thoughts @cartermckinnon?
Sounds reasonable, looks like we'll get the tags from ec2:DescribeInstances. ASG guarantees that will be added at creation, not after launch: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/autoscaling/ec2/userguide/ec2-auto-scaling-tagging.html#tag-lifecycle
Took a look at the code paths and it's a bit of a mess. We should reuse the ec2:DescribeInstances response in our InstancesV2.InstanceMetadata implementation, we have a few redundant calls today. But we can pass this new label with the AdditionalLabels field.
I think we'll want to use a label under the *.k8s.aws namespace, not node.kubernetes.io
🙏🏻🙏🏻 the complexity reduction this would bring to my k8s node group upgrade script would be massive 🤞🏻.
+1 to what Carter is saying. There's currently one well known label in the cloud provider: topology.k8s.aws/zone-id. Something like node.k8s.aws/auto-scaling-group-name might be the one.
Is this something you're looking for an outside contributor to implement (not yet sure how I would test it or I would have made an attempt already) or should I sit tight and let y'all do your thing?
I'll put something together, I'd like to do some cleanup anyway 😄
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle stale - Close this issue with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
I am seeing the following labels applied to new nodes:
eks.amazonaws.com/nodegroup
eks.amazonaws.com/sourceLaunchTemplateId
eks.amazonaws.com/sourceLaunchTemplateVersion
Out of curiosity, where was this implemented? I don't see it in this repo?
I am seeing the following labels applied to new nodes:
eks.amazonaws.com/nodegroupeks.amazonaws.com/sourceLaunchTemplateIdeks.amazonaws.com/sourceLaunchTemplateVersionOut of curiosity, where was this implemented? I don't see it in this repo?
That's not part of the cloud provider. You must be using EKS Managed Node Groups, which applies those labels.
Ah! That makes sense, you're absolutely right. So many clusters. So much config 😵💫.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Close this issue with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle-rotten
checking in again to see if y'all are desirous of a contribution for this? some small guidance on testing and the cleanup you'd hoped to implement would be enough for me to dig in, I imagine.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Reopen this issue with
/reopen - Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close not-planned
@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned".
In response to this:
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closedYou can:
- Reopen this issue with
/reopen- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten- Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close not-planned
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.
/reopen
@tkellen: Reopened this issue.
In response to this:
/reopen
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.
Anyone out there to respond to #884 (comment)? I would be glad to implement this.