consul

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
R.B. Boyer	5afd04897c	test: use direct service registration in envoy integration tests (#9138 ) This has the biggest impact on enterprise test cases that use namespaced registrations, which prior to this change sometimes failed the initial registration because the namespace was not yet created.	4 years ago
R.B. Boyer	9801ef8eb1	agent: enable enable_central_service_config by default (#8746 )	4 years ago
Matt Keeler	0041102e29	Change where the envoy snapshots get put when a test fails (#7298 ) This will allow us to capture them in CI	5 years ago
R.B. Boyer	2cd5a7e542	tests: make envoy integration tests more tolerant of internal retries that may inflate counters (#6539 ) This should remove false positives that look like: cluster.s2.default.primary.*cx_total - expected count: 2, actual count: 3	5 years ago
R.B. Boyer	8e22d80e35	connect: fix failover through a mesh gateway to a remote datacenter (#6259 ) Failover is pushed entirely down to the data plane by creating envoy clusters and putting each successive destination in a different load assignment priority band. For example this shows that normally requests go to 1.2.3.4:8080 but when that fails they go to 6.7.8.9:8080: - name: foo load_assignment: cluster_name: foo policy: overprovisioning_factor: 100000 endpoints: - priority: 0 lb_endpoints: - endpoint: address: socket_address: address: 1.2.3.4 port_value: 8080 - priority: 1 lb_endpoints: - endpoint: address: socket_address: address: 6.7.8.9 port_value: 8080 Mesh gateways route requests based solely on the SNI header tacked onto the TLS layer. Envoy currently only lets you configure the outbound SNI header at the cluster layer. If you try to failover through a mesh gateway you ideally would configure the SNI value per endpoint, but that's not possible in envoy today. This PR introduces a simpler way around the problem for now: 1. We identify any target of failover that will use mesh gateway mode local or remote and then further isolate any resolver node in the compiled discovery chain that has a failover destination set to one of those targets. 2. For each of these resolvers we will perform a small measurement of comparative healths of the endpoints that come back from the health API for the set of primary target and serial failover targets. We walk the list of targets in order and if any endpoint is healthy we return that target, otherwise we move on to the next target. 3. The CDS and EDS endpoints both perform the measurements in (2) for the affected resolver nodes. 4. For CDS this measurement selects which TLS SNI field to use for the cluster (note the cluster is always going to be named for the primary target) 5. For EDS this measurement selects which set of endpoints will populate the cluster. Priority tiered failover is ignored. One of the big downsides to this approach to failover is that the failover detection and correction is going to be controlled by consul rather than deferring that entirely to the data plane as with the prior version. This also means that we are bound to only failover using official health signals and cannot make use of data plane signals like outlier detection to affect failover. In this specific scenario the lack of data plane signals is ok because the effectiveness is already muted by the fact that the ultimate destination endpoints will have their data plane signals scrambled when they pass through the mesh gateway wrapper anyway so we're not losing much. Another related fix is that we now use the endpoint health from the underlying service, not the health of the gateway (regardless of failover mode).	5 years ago

5 Commits (752e3ec0b14ed18b3ce8fc146984ccb44d8a66ec)