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.

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

docs(proposal): externaldns api graduation to beta #5079

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/proposal/design-template.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
title: New Feature or Deprecation/Removal Proposal
version: if applicable
authors: you, me
creation-date: 2025-01-01
creation-date: 2025-jan-01
status: draft
---
```
Expand Down
164 changes: 164 additions & 0 deletions docs/proposal/dnsendpoint-graduation-to-beta.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
```yaml
---
title: "Proposal: API DNSEndpoint graduation to beta"
version: tbd
authors: ivankatliarchuk
creation-date: 2025-feb-9
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: let's fix this date too?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@ivankatliarchuk ivankatliarchuk Feb 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you prefer dates to be in certain format, no jan|feb|march ? Or what exactly?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd go for ISO 8601: YYYY-MM-DD

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated in separate pull request #5128

status: proposal
---
```

# Proposal: Agree on requirements for API DNSEndpoint to graduate to beta

## Summary

The `DNSEndpoint` API in Kubernetes SIGs `external-dns` is currently in alpha. To ensure its stability and readiness for production environments, we propose defining and agreeing upon the necessary requirements for its graduation to beta. By defining clear criteria, we aim to ensure stability, usability, and compatibility with the broader Kubernetes ecosystem. On completions of all this items, we should be in the position to graduate `DNSEndpoint` to `v1beta`.

## Motivation

The DNSEndpoint API is a crucial component of the ExternalDNS project, allowing users to manage DNS records dynamically. Currently, it remains in the alpha stage, limiting its adoption due to potential instability and lack of guaranteed backward compatibility. By advancing to beta, we can provide users with a more reliable API and encourage wider adoption with confidence in its long-term viability and support.

### Goals

- Define the necessary requirements for `DNSEndpoint` API to reach beta status.
- Improve API stability, usability, and documentation.
- Improve test coverage, automate documentation creation, and validation mechanisms.
- Ensure backward compatibility and migration strategies from alpha to beta.
- Collect and incorporate feedback from existing users to refine the API.
- Address any identified issues or limitations in the current API design.

### Non-Goals

- This proposal does not cover the graduation of ExternalDNS itself to a stable release.
- Making `DNSEndpoint` a stable (GA) API at this stage.
- It does not include implementation details for specific DNS providers.
- It does not introduce new functionality beyond stabilizing the DNSEndpoint API.
- Redesigning the API from scratch.
- Introducing breaking changes that would require significant refactoring for existing users.

## Proposal

The proposal aims to formalize the promotion process by addressing API design, user needs, and implementation details.

To graduate the `DNSEndpoint` API to beta, we propose the following actions:

1. Refactor `endpoint` folder, move away `api/crd` related stuff to `apis/<apiVersion> folder`
2. Documentation for API to be generated automatically with test coverage, similar to `docs/flags.md`
3. API(s) and CRD(s) discoverable. [doc.crds.dev](https://doc.crds.dev/github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns). Example [crosplane](https://doc.crds.dev/github.com/crossplane/[email protected])
4. TBD
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would add: review and change .status object such that people can debug and monitor DNSEndpoint object behavior.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agree. Will add that one too. There is a status field issue #2092. It's actually recommended to have it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added

5. TBD
Copy link
Contributor

@szuecs szuecs Feb 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add: introduce a metric for objects and errors if not already available (review if this is available)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point. Trying to understand what are the metrics currently available to us.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added


Proposed folder structure for `apis`. Examples - [gateway-api](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api/tree/main/apis)

***Multiple APIs under same version***

```yml
├── apis
│ ├── v1alpha
│ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
│ ├── v1beta # outside of scope currently, just an example
│ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
│ ├── v1 # outside of scope currently, just an example
│ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
```

Or similar folder structure for `apis`. Examples - [cert-manager](https://github.com/cert-manager/cert-manager/tree/master/pkg/apis)

***APIs versioned independently***

```yml
├── apis
│ ├── dnsendpoint
│ │ ├── v1alpha
│ │ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
│ │ ├── v1beta # outside of scope currently, just an example
│ │ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
│ │ ├── v1 # outside of scope currently, just an example
│ │ │ ├── util/validation
│ │ │ ├── doc.go
│ │ │ └── zz_generated.***.go
│ ├── dnsentry
│ │ ├── v1alpha
```

### User Stories

#### Story 1: Cluster Operator/Admin Managing External DNS

_As a cluster operator or administrator_, I want a stable `DNSEndpoint` API to reliably manage DNS records within Kubernetes so that I can ensure consistent and automated DNS resolution for my services.

#### Story 2: Developers Integrating External DNS

_As a developer_, I want a well-documented `DNSEndpoint` API that allows me to programmatically define and manage DNS records without worrying about breaking changes.

#### Story 3: Cloud-Native Deployments

_As an SRE_, I need a tested and validated `DNSEndpoint` API that integrates seamlessly with cloud-native networking services, ensuring high availability and scalability.

#### Story 4: Platform Engineer

_As a platform engineer_, I want stronger validation and defaulting so that I can reduce misconfigurations and operational overhead.

### API

The DNSEndpoint API should provide a robust Custom Resource Definition (CRD) with well-defined fields and validation.

#### DNSEndpoint

- [ ] DNSEndpoint do not have any changes from v1alpha1.
- [ ] DNSEndpoint to have changes from v1alpha1. `TBD`

```yml
apiVersion: externaldns.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: DNSEndpoint
metadata:
name: example-endpoint
spec:
endpoints:
- dnsName: "example.com"
recordType: "A"
targets:
- "192.168.1.1"
ttl: 300
- dnsName: "www.example.com"
recordType: "CNAME"
targets:
- "example.com"
```

### Behavior

How should the new CRD or feature behave? Are there edge cases?

### Drawbacks

- Transitioning to beta may require deprecating certain alpha features that are deemed unstable.
- Increased maintenance effort to ensure stability and backward compatibility.
- Users of the alpha API may need to adjust their configurations if breaking changes are introduced.
- Additional maintenance and support burden for the `external-dns` maintainers.

## Alternatives

1. **Remain in Alpha**: The DNSEndpoint API could remain in alpha indefinitely, but this would discourage adoption and limit its reliability.
- Pros: No immediate changes or migration concerns.
- Cons: Lack of progress discourages adoption, and users may seek alternative solutions.
2. **Graduate Directly to GA**: Skipping the beta phase could accelerate stability, but it would limit the opportunity for community feedback and refinement.
3. **Introduce a New API Version**: Instead of modifying the existing API, a new version (e.g., `v2alpha1`) could be introduced, allowing gradual migration.
- Pros: Allowing gradual migration like `v1alpha1` -> `v2alpha1` -> `v1beta`
- Cons: This approach would require maintaining multiple versions simultaneously.
4. **Redesign the API Before Graduation**
- Pros: Provides an opportunity to fix any fundamental design flaws before moving to beta.
- Cons: Increases complexity, delays the beta release, and may introduce unnecessary work for existing users.
5. **Deprecate DNSEndpoint and Rely on External Solutions or Annotations**
- Pros: Potentially reduces the maintenance burden on the Kubernetes SIG.
- Cons: Forces users to migrate to third-party solutions or away from CRDs, reducing the cohesion of external-dns within Kubernetes.
Loading