Self-hosting support in kubeadm

[luxas]

Feature Description

• One-line feature description (can be used as a release note): A new way of deploying the control plane; self-hosted, is added to kubeadm. There are two modes of storing certificates: on-disk (using hostPath) and using Secrets.
• Primary contact (assignee): @luxas @timothysc
• Responsible SIGs: SIG-cluster-lifecycle
• Design proposal link (community repo):
  • Follow-up selfhosting improvements kubeadm#127
  • [WIP] Add kubeadm upgrades proposal community#825
• Reviewer(s) - (for LGTM) recommend having 2+ reviewers (at least one from code-area OWNERS file) agreed to review. Reviewers from multiple companies preferred: @luxas @jbeda @mattmoyer
• Approver (likely from SIG/area to which feature belongs): @luxas @jbeda @timothysc
• Feature target (which target equals to which milestone):
  • Alpha release target: 1.8
  • Beta release target: 1.9
  • Stable release target: 1.10

[luxas]

I now realized that the scope of #296 and its relation to this issue had to be clarified. Self-hosting is not required for upgrades; but make them easier.
I saw this it is needed to split these into two separate issues

[idvoretskyi]

@luxas please, update the features tracking board with the relevant data.

[luxas]

@idvoretskyi Done

[luxas]

And working on docs...

[jdumars]

@luxas any update on docs? PR is due today.

[luxas]

Targeting beta (and probably on-by-default) in v1.9

[zacharysarah]

@luxas 👋 Please indicate in the 1.9 feature tracking board
whether this feature needs documentation. If yes, please open a PR and add a link to the tracking spreadsheet. Thanks in advance!

[zacharysarah]

@luxas Bump for docs ☝️

/cc @idvoretskyi

[jamiehannaford]

@luxas @zacharysarah We already have docs for self-hosted here which describe the concept, the process and current limitations. Since we haven't added any functionality in 1.9 that breaks that model I don't think there's anything else to add. When we graduate it to beta in 1.10 we might be able to move this section to its own page and add more implementation details.

With that being said, are you folks happy to mark it in the spreadsheet as "no docs required"?

[luxas]

Marked this as no new docs required as kubernetes/website#5497 has us covered.
Also updated the spreadsheet

[zacharysarah]

@luxas Thanks for the update.

@jamiehannaford Hey there, stranger! 👋 Nice to see you again.

[fejta-bot]

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

[fejta-bot]

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle stale

[justaugustus]

@luxas @timothysc
Any plans for this in 1.11?

If so, can you please ensure the feature is up-to-date with the appropriate:

• Description
• Milestone
• Assignee(s)
• Labels:
  • stage/{alpha,beta,stable}
  • sig/*
  • kind/feature

cc @idvoretskyi

[luxas]

/lifecycle frozen

@justaugustus No specific plans for v1.11, still keeping in beta.

[justaugustus]

/remove-lifecycle frozen

[luxas]

We're discontinuing/deprecating the support for self-hosting in v1.12, so I'm closing this issue.
cc @timothysc

[stp-ip]

@luxas is there a final discussion around that decision you could link for context? thx

[timothysc]

@stp-ip The decision was made during over the course of several SIG calls. The complexity it adds to the kubeadm is non-trivial, and it's possible todo this outside of kubeadm today. Some point in the future we(sig-cluster-lifecycle) may provide a pivot utility tool that helps folks transition from static manifest to self-hosted, but that remains TBD.