Add TLSRoute Hostname Validation #736
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ghost
requested a review
from 
ghost
self-assigned this
mikestvz
reviewed
May 23, 2025
| case *core.TLSRoute: | ||
| routeType = core.TlsRouteType | ||
| // VPC Lattice requires a custom domain name for TLS listeners | ||
| if len(t.route.Spec().Hostnames()) == 0 { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In which scenario will the hostname will be nil ? Is this a user configuration that needs to be highlighted for customers in docs ?
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
Bug
Which issue does this PR fix:
#649
What does this PR do / Why do we need it:
This adds a validation to ensure at least one hostname is present when using a TLSRoute.
Testing done on this change:
The
TLSRoute without hostname should failunit test was added to validate the new logic.Automation added to e2e:
None.
Will this PR introduce any new dependencies?:
No.
Will this break upgrades or downgrades. Has updating a running cluster been tested?:
No.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?:
Do all end-to-end tests successfully pass when running
make e2e-test?:By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.