gRPC port is missing

[jpkrohling]

I might be missing something, but looks like we are not currently adding the gRPC port (14250) to the all-in-one nor collector deployments:

jaeger-operator/pkg/deployment/all-in-one.go

Lines 128 to 168 in a059701

	Ports: []corev1.ContainerPort{
	{
	ContainerPort: 5775,
	Name: "zk-compact-trft", // max 15 chars!
	Protocol: corev1.ProtocolUDP,
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 5778,
	Name: "config-rest",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 6831,
	Name: "jg-compact-trft",
	Protocol: corev1.ProtocolUDP,
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 6832,
	Name: "jg-binary-trft",
	Protocol: corev1.ProtocolUDP,
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 9411,
	Name: "zipkin",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 14267,
	Name: "c-tchan-trft", // for collector
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 14268,
	Name: "c-binary-trft",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 16686,
	Name: "query",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: adminPort,
	Name: "admin-http",
	},
	},

jaeger-operator/pkg/deployment/collector.go

Lines 145 to 162 in a059701

	Ports: []corev1.ContainerPort{
	{
	ContainerPort: 9411,
	Name: "zipkin",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 14267,
	Name: "c-tchan-trft", // for collector
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: 14268,
	Name: "c-binary-trft",
	},
	{
	ContainerPort: adminPort,
	Name: "admin-http",
	},
	},

[jpkrohling]

The agent in sidecar is using gRPC:

jaeger-operator/pkg/inject/sidecar.go

Line 111 in a059701

args = append(args, fmt.Sprintf("--reporter.grpc.host-port=dns:///%s.%s:14250", service.GetNameForHeadlessCollectorService(jaeger), jaeger.Namespace))

Also, the service does use expose the gRPC port:

jaeger-operator/pkg/service/collector.go

Lines 71 to 74 in a059701

	{
	Name: "grpc",
	Port: 14250,
	},

At this point, I'm sure I'm missing something, just not sure what.

[yeya24]

So I guess we just need to add port 14250?

[jpkrohling]

Yes, but before, I'd like to understand why it's apparently working :-) Could you try removing the port 16686 and attempting to access the UI?

[yeya24]

Yes, but before, I'd like to understand why it's apparently working :-) Could you try removing the port 16686 and attempting to access the UI?

Yes, if I remove 16686 in all-in-one container port, it still works. I think the only thing matters is the ports in Service. It will still set up proxy rules for 16686 if I configure it in Service, no matter whether you set 16686 in your container port.

[bhavin192]

@yeya24 yes, you are right. From API reference docs,

List of ports to expose from the container. Exposing a port here gives the system additional information about the network connections a container uses, but is primarily informational. Not specifying a port here DOES NOT prevent that port from being exposed. Any port which is listening on the default "0.0.0.0" address inside a container will be accessible from the network. Cannot be updated.

https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/v1.15/#container-v1-core

[jpkrohling]

Wonderful, thanks for digging that up, @bhavin192! @yeya24 you may go ahead and add the missing port