Skip to content

Conversation

@alpeb
Copy link
Member

@alpeb alpeb commented Dec 4, 2025

(Extracted from #14566)

The "opaque ports are properly annotated" check had a bug where it only validated regular containers, missing ports in init containers (native sidecars). This meant mismatched annotations between pods and services could go undetected when the port belonged to an init container.

When a service had the opaque-ports annotation but the corresponding pod did not, the check would incorrectly pass if the port was defined in an init container instead of a regular container.

This commit extends the check to validate ports in both regular containers and init containers, ensuring consistent opaque-ports annotations across pods and services regardless of where the port is defined.

…ck --proxy`

(Extracted from #14566)

The "opaque ports are properly annotated" check had a bug where it only
validated regular containers, missing ports in init containers (native
sidecars). This meant mismatched annotations between pods and services
could go undetected when the port belonged to an init container.

When a service had the opaque-ports annotation but the corresponding pod
did not, the check would incorrectly pass if the port was defined in an
init container instead of a regular container.

This commit extends the check to validate ports in both regular containers
and init containers, ensuring consistent opaque-ports annotations across
pods and services regardless of where the port is defined.
@alpeb alpeb merged commit c7a35ee into main Dec 5, 2025
67 of 69 checks passed
@alpeb alpeb deleted the alpeb/nativesidecar-healthcheck branch December 5, 2025 13:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants