Re: Deprecate route-sync from CFCR to CFAR
|
Gabriel Rosenhouse <grosenhouse@...>
Also: I suspect that the CFCR route-sync feature has a dangerous interaction with CFAR Cloud Controller, if both CFCR and CFAR are sharing a TCP Routing API. CFAR Cloud Controller creates and uses a TCP Router Group for itself, and expects to completely own that router group. My reading of the CFCR code is that route-sync will happily discover and use that Router Group as-is. The CFAR Routing API has no mechanism to prevent this collision, or to prevent the two clients from reserving the same TCP port for different backends. I think that the result will be that ingress to that TCP Router Port will get load balanced to both the CFAR App and the CFCR Service. This is likely not what the user intends. On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:14 AM, arghya sadhu <arghya88@...> wrote:
|
|
|