Change:
return nil } <ins> func testReachabilityOverExternalIP(externalIP string, sp v1.ServicePort, execPod *v1.Pod) error { return testEndpointReachability(externalIP, sp.Port, sp.Protocol, execPod) } </ins> func testReachabilityOverNodePorts(nodes *v1.NodeList, sp v1.ServicePort, pod *v1.Pod, clusterIP string) error { internalAddrs := e2enode.CollectAddresses(nodes, v1.NodeInternalIP) externalAddrs := e2enode.CollectAddresses(nodes, v1.NodeExternalIP)

Discussion:
What would you like to be : e2e test for service ExternalIPs Why is this needed: There is no test covering Service ExternalIPs Since we can not assume that the e2e binary will have connectivity against the nodes and that we can add routes to the environment, we are going to test it from a pod. I've verified that this works locally with the following commands: The test should leverage current framework, maybe something as A good example is here, maybe adding a ?
/sig network /help wanted /triage accepted
/help wanted /good-first-issue
/assign
I'd like to pick this up!
Ok,I'm not started :) /unassign /assign
There are two different externalIP codepaths, one for the case where the claimed external IP exists as an IP on the default interface, and one for where it does not. I suppose we could just temporarily add an IP to the default interface...
good idea Dan Please remember, it has to work for IPv6 and for IPv4 ... anyway, we can address these things during the review
This has been partially implemented with . Covering the code path for when an IP is does not exist on a node. I'll assign this back to you so you can split this issue or close it in favor of another issue. Thanks! /unassign /assign
what is the different codepath for ExternalIPs that already exist on the host? ~My reading is that the only difference is that it opens a local socket on that port, can you expand on this?~ Found it
so, it seems that this work in some environments because they are not using the bridge plugin why is not allowed that pods can reach ExternalIPs?
Wow, this is ancient and needs some fixing. This is not about preventing pod traffic from reaching those IPs. I had to really stare at it, and I am not 100% in my interpretation. First, we recognize such traffic from "off machine" (!physdev-is-in && !src=LOCAL, which we should probably switch to localDetector) and steer it to the Service. Second, we recognize ANY such traffic that is destined for a LOCAL address and shortcut that to the Service, Implicitly, traffic destined for this IP where the IP is not local goes to the system's default routing logic.

The reliance on the bridge plugin is awful and archaic and I will buy a beverage of your choice for whomever gets rid of that. I think localDetector can cover this, but not 100% sure
but the ExternalIP belongs to a service and we(kube-proxy) "knows" where to send it (to the service) , that is the part I'm not sure to understand, because whatever the user is doing with that ExternalIP it has to send it back to the cluster to reach the service. However, there is always context that is important and maybe I'm missing something. Assuming we want to handle ALL the ExternalIP traffic with kube-proxy, the logic will be much simpler: traffic to an externalIP will be ALWAYS sent to the Service (DNAT) if traffic is NOT LOCAL, we also SNAT
/remove-good-first-issue /remove-help-wanted