Kubernetes Test Cases and Requirements Traceability ¶
Introduction ¶
All of the requirements for RC2 have been defined in the Reference Model (RM) and Reference Architecture (RA2). The scope of this chapter is to identify and list down test cases based on these requirements. Users of this chapter will be able to use it to determine which test cases they must run in order to test compliance with the requirements. This will enable traceability between the test cases and requirements. They should be able to clearly see which requirements are covered by which tests and the mapping from a specific test result (pass or fail) to a requirement. Each requirement may have one or more test case associated with it.
Goals ¶
- Clear mapping between requirements and test cases
- Provide a stable set of point-in-time requirements and tests to achieve conformance
- Enable clear traceability of the coverage of requirements across consecutive releases of this document
- Clickable links from test cases to requirements
- One or more tests for every MUST requirement
- A set of test cases to serve as a template for Anuket Assured
Non-Goals ¶
- Defining any requirements
- Providing coverage for non-testable requirements
Definitions ¶
must : Test Cases that are marked as must are considered mandatory and must pass successfully
should : Test Cases that are marked as should are expected to be fulfilled by the cloud infrastructure but it is up to each service provider whether to accept a cloud infrastructure that is not fulfilling any of these requirements. The same applies to should not.
may : Test cases that are marked as may are considered optional. The same applies to may not.
Traceability Matrix ¶
Kubernetes API testing ¶
The primary objectives of the e2e tests are to ensure a consistent and reliable behavior of the Kubernetes code base, and to catch hard-to-test bugs before users do, when unit and integration tests are insufficient. They are partially selected for the Software Conformance Certification program run by the Kubernetes community (under the aegis of the CNCF).
Anuket shares the same goal to give end users the confidence that when they use a certified product they can rely on a high level of common functionality. Then Anuket RC2 starts with the test list defined by K8s Conformance which is expected to grow according to the ongoing requirement traceability.
End-to-End Testing basically asks for focus and skip regexes to select or to blacklist single tests:
- focus basically matches Conformance or Testing Special Interest Groups in sub-sections below
- skip excludes the SIG labels listed as optional in Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6
The Reference Conformance suites must be stable and executed on real deployments. Then all the following labels are defacto skipped in End-to-End Testing :
- alpha
- Disruptive
- Flaky
It’s worth mentioning that no alpha or Flaky test can be included in Conformance as per the rules.
Conformance ¶
It must be noted that the default K8s Conformance testing is disruptive thus Anuket RC2 rather picks non-disruptive-conformance testing as defined by Sonobuoy .
focus: [Conformance]
skip:
- [Disruptive]
- NoExecuteTaintManager
API Machinery Testing ¶
focus: [sig-api-machinery]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:CrossNamespacePodAffinity]
- [Feature:StorageVersionAPI]
See API Machinery Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6 for more details.
Apps Testing ¶
focus: [sig-apps]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:DaemonSetUpdateSurge]
- [Feature:IndexedJob]
- [Feature:StatefulSet]
- [Feature:StatefulUpgrade]
- [Feature:SuspendJob]
See Apps Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6 for more details.
Auth Testing ¶
focus: [sig-auth]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:BoundServiceAccountTokenVolume]
- [Feature:PodSecurityPolicy]
See Auth Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6 for more details.
Cluster Lifecycle Testing ¶
focus: [sig-cluster-lifecycle]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
See Cluster Lifecycle Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6 for more details.
Instrumentation Testing ¶
focus: [sig-instrumentation]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:Elasticsearch]
- [Feature:StackdriverAcceleratorMonitoring]
- [Feature:StackdriverCustomMetrics]
- [Feature:StackdriverExternalMetrics]
- [Feature:StackdriverMetadataAgent]
- [Feature:StackdriverMonitoring]
See Instrumentation Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6 for more details.
Network Testing ¶
The regexes load.balancer, LoadBalancer and Network.should.set.TCP.CLOSE_WAIT.timeout are currently skipped because they haven’t been covered successfully neither by sig-release-1.22-blocking nor by Anuket RC2 verification
Please note that a couple of tests must be skipped by name below as they are no appropriate labels.
focus: [sig-network]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:Example]
- [Feature:Ingress]
- [Feature:IPv6DualStack]
- [Feature:kubemci]
- [Feature:KubeProxyDaemonSetMigration]
- [Feature:KubeProxyDaemonSetUpgrade]
- [Feature:NEG]
- [Feature:Networking-IPv6]
- [Feature:NetworkPolicy]
- [Feature:PerformanceDNS]
- [Feature:SCTP]
- [Feature:SCTPConnectivity]
- DNS configMap nameserver
- load.balancer
- LoadBalancer
- Network.should.set.TCP.CLOSE_WAIT.timeout
See Network Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6
Node Testing ¶
focus: [sig-node]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:ExperimentalResourceUsageTracking]
- [Feature:GPUUpgrade]
- [Feature:PodGarbageCollector]
- [Feature:RegularResourceUsageTracking]
- [NodeFeature:DownwardAPIHugePages]
- [NodeFeature:RuntimeHandler]
See Node Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6
Scheduling Testing ¶
focus: [sig-scheduling]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Feature:GPUDevicePlugin]
- [Feature:Recreate]
See Scheduling Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6
Storage Testing ¶
It should be noted that all in-tree driver testing, [Driver:+], is skipped. Conforming to the upstream gate , all PersistentVolumes NFS testing is also skipped. The following exclusions are about the deprecated in-tree GitRepo volume type :
- should provision storage with different parameters
- should not cause race condition when used for git_repo
Please note that a couple of tests must be skipped by name below as they are no appropriate labels.
focus: [sig-storage]
skip:
- [alpha]
- [Disruptive]
- [Flaky]
- [Driver:+]
- [Feature:ExpandInUsePersistentVolumes]
- [Feature:Flexvolumes]
- [Feature:GKELocalSSD]
- [Feature:VolumeSnapshotDataSource]
- [Feature:Flexvolumes]
- [Feature:vsphere]
- [Feature:Volumes]
- [Feature:Windows]
- [NodeFeature:EphemeralStorage]
- PersistentVolumes.NFS
- should provision storage with different parameters
- should not cause race condition when used for git_repo
See Storage Special Interest Group and Reference Architecture-2 (RA-2) Chapter 6
Kubernetes API benchmarking ¶
Rally is a tool and framework that performs Kubernetes API benchmarking.
Functest Kubernetes Benchmarking proposed a Rally-based test case, xrally_kubernetes_full , which iterates 10 times the mainline xrally-kubernetes scenarios.
At the time of writing, no KPI is defined in Kubernetes based Reference Architecture which would have asked for an update of the default SLA (maximum failure rate of 0%) proposed in Functest Kubernetes Benchmarking
Functest xrally_kubernetes_full :
| Scenarios | Iterations |
|---|---|
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_deployment | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_job | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_namespace | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_configmap_volume | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_configmap_volume [2] | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_emptydir_volume | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_emptydir_volume [2] | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_hostpath_volume | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_secret_volume | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_pod_with_secret_volume [2] | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_replicaset | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_replication_controller | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_and_delete_statefulset | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_check_and_delete_pod_with_cluster_ip_service | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_check_and_delete_pod_with_cluster_ip_service [2] | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_check_and_delete_pod_with_node_port_service | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_rollout_and_delete_deployment | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_scale_and_delete_replicaset | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_scale_and_delete_replication_controller | 10 |
| Kubernetes.create_scale_and_delete_statefulset | 10 |
| Kubernetes.list_namespaces | 10 |
The following software versions are considered to benchmark Kubernetes v1.22 (latest stable release) selected by Anuket:
| software | version |
|---|---|
| Functest | v1.22 |
| xrally-kubernetes | 1.1.1.dev12 |
Dataplane benchmarking ¶
Kubernetes perf-tests repository hosts various Kubernetes-related performance test related tools especially netperf which benchmarks Kubernetes networking performance.
As listed in netperf’s README , the 5 major network traffic paths are combination of pod IP vs virtual IP and whether the pods are co-located on the same node versus a remotely located pod:
- same node using pod IP
- same node using cluster/virtual IP
- remote node using pod IP
- remote node using cluster/virtual IP
- same node pod hairpin to itself using cluster/virtual IP
It should be noted that netperf leverages iperf (both TCP and UDP modes) and Netperf .
At the time of writing, no KPI is defined in Anuket chapters which would have asked for an update of the default SLA proposed in Functest Kubernetes Benchmarking .
Security testing ¶
There are a couple of opensource tools that help securing the Kubernetes stack. Amongst them, Functest Kubernetes Security offers two test cases based on kube-hunter and kube-bench .
kube-hunter hunts for security weaknesses in Kubernetes clusters and kube-bench checks whether Kubernetes is deployed securely by running the checks documented in the CIS Kubernetes Benchmark .
kube-hunter classifies all vulnerabilities as low, medium, and high. In context of this conformance suite, only the high vulnerabilities lead to a test case failure. Then all low and medium vulnerabilities are only printed for information.
Here are the vulnerability categories tagged as high by kube-hunter :
- RemoteCodeExec
- IdentityTheft
- PrivilegeEscalation
At the time of writing, none of the Center for Internet Security (CIS) rules are defined as mandatory (e.g. sec.std.001: The Cloud Operator should comply with Center for Internet Security CIS Controls) else it would have required an update of the default kube-bench behavior (all failures and warnings are only printed) as integrated in Functest Kubernetes Security .
The following software versions are considered to verify Kubernetes v1.22 (latest stable release) selected by Anuket:
| software | version |
|---|---|
| Functest | v1.22 |
| kube-hunter | 0.3.1 |
| kube-bench | 0.3.1 |
Opensource CNF onboarding and testing ¶
Running opensource containerized network functions (CNF) is a key technical solution to ensure that the platforms meet Network Functions Virtualization requirements.
Functest CNF offers 2 test cases which automatically onboard and test Clearwater IMS via kubecltl and Helm. It’s worth mentioning that this CNF is covered by the upstream tests (see clearwater-live-test ).
The following software versions are considered to verify Kubernetes v1.22 (latest stable release) selected by Anuket:
| software | version |
|---|---|
| Functest | v1.22 |
| clearwater | release-130 |
| Helm | v3.3.1 |
Test Cases Traceability to Requirements ¶
The following test case must pass as they are for Reference Conformance:
| container | test suite | criteria | requirements |
|---|---|---|---|
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | xrally_kubernetes | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | k8s_conformance | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | k8s_conformance_serial | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_api_machinery | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_api_machinery_serial | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_apps | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_apps_serial | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_auth | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_cluster_lifecycle | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_instrumentation | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_network | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_node | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_scheduling_serial | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_storage | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-smoke:v1.22 | sig_storage_serial | PASS | Kubernetes API testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-security:v1.22 | kube_hunter | PASS | Security testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-security:v1.22 | kube_bench_master | PASS | Security testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-security:v1.22 | kube_bench_node | PASS | Security testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-benchmarking:v1.22 | xrally_kubernetes_full | PASS | Kubernetes API benchmarking |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-benchmarking:v1.22 | netperf | PASS | Dataplane benchmarking |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-cnf:v1.22 | k8s_vims | PASS | Opensource CNF onboarding and testing |
| opnfv/functest-kubernetes-cnf:v1.22 | helm_vims | PASS | Opensource CNF onboarding and testing |