You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is not a security vulnerability or a crashing bug
This is not a question about how to use Istio
Bug Description
I tried to deploy the istiod helm chart using a private registry and associated image pull secret.
Upon deployment, the pod failed with ErrImagePull. Describing the pod, it displayed an event complaining about unauthorized access to the private registry.
I checked the rendered helm chart for istiod and the image pull secret isn’t referenced anywhere in the chart. I also searched the charts for each various past versions and this looks to be an ongoing issue.
Please update istiod helm chart so it leverages imagepullsecrets.
Version
Kubectl version - 1.30
Helm chart version - latest
Chart - manifests/charts/istio-control/istio-discovery
Additional Information
There was a previous PR created to resolve this issue, but was closed with no comments.
Ref: #50139
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
the imagePullSecret implementation for istiod is at its ServiceAcount level here.
From Kubernetes docs:
Now, when a new Pod is created in the current namespace and using the default ServiceAccount, the new Pod has its spec.imagePullSecrets field set automatically
Is this the right place to submit this?
Bug Description
I tried to deploy the istiod helm chart using a private registry and associated image pull secret.
Upon deployment, the pod failed with ErrImagePull. Describing the pod, it displayed an event complaining about unauthorized access to the private registry.
I checked the rendered helm chart for istiod and the image pull secret isn’t referenced anywhere in the chart. I also searched the charts for each various past versions and this looks to be an ongoing issue.
Please update istiod helm chart so it leverages imagepullsecrets.
Version
Additional Information
There was a previous PR created to resolve this issue, but was closed with no comments.
Ref: #50139
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: