Fix: nginx proxy server list not changed

[chengjoey]

What this PR does / why we need it:

The logic of updating the proxy server list seems to be unrelated to generateTemplate. If ssl-passthrough is enabled but the config has not changed, the proxy server list will not be updated. However, the service corresponding to passthrough may have changed. Therefore, the logic of updating the server list should be placed before onUpdate.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• CVE Report (Scanner found CVE and adding report)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation only

Which issue/s this PR fixes

fixes #11963

How Has This Been Tested?

Checklist:

• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I've read the CONTRIBUTION guide
• I have added unit and/or e2e tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: chengjoey
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign gacko for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If Ingress contributors determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @chengjoey. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-ingress-nginx canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	acaba8b
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-ingress-nginx/deploys/673526a2a063f00008eaa924

[rikatz]

/hold

We are going to deprecate TLS Passthrough on the next release, I wouldn't like to touch this for now.

[anvpetrov]

/hold

We are going to deprecate TLS Passthrough on the next release, I wouldn't like to touch this for now.

What would be the alternative?

[strongjz]

We're not going to deprecate this in the next few releases or add new functionality.

This functionality will be migrated to the appropriate place in our gateway api implementation.

[anvpetrov]

We're not going to deprecate this in the next few releases or add new functionality.

This functionality will be migrated to the appropriate place in our gateway api implementation.

can we expect a fix?
I think this is a serious problem that could cause a failure.

[longwuyuan]

@chengjoey @anvpetrov the basic description of the problem does not have any merit for any action from the project or to change current behavior. If you want to change the issue-description to something that is a practical, then the reviews could make some sense. You are basically saying this ;

• Step1 = Create a Deployment, a Service for that deployment and then an Ingress object for that service with tls-passthrough
• Step2 = Delete the deployment and service
• Step3 = Recreate deployment and service (as fast as possible)

And then you are setting an completely INVALID expectation, that routing of traffic should happen, BEFORE the endpoint-slice used by the controller, gets a update on the available endpoints.

Why should this controller NOT synchronize, and why should the controller NOT get the updated list of endpoints for routing ? After a delete event on the previous endpooints, it seems like a obvious workflow, to get the updated endpoints and only then route the traffic. The current written/implied expectation makes no sense, in current description text of the issue.

/triage needs-information