OCPBUGS-63152: use IPFamilies template for wait-for-node-ip

[rbbratta]

See if we can use the kubelet dualstack node-ip templating info to help with wait-for-node-ip.sh.

If kubelet is not trying to bind to an IPv6 address, then we don't need to wait for the IPv6 address?

Cursor AI assisted.

[openshift-merge-bot]

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: LGTM mode

[openshift-ci-robot]

@rbbratta: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63152, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target either version "5.0." or "openshift-5.0.", but it targets "4.23.0" instead
• expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, POST, but it is ON_QA instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

See if we can use the kubelet dualstack node-ip templating info to help with wait-for-node-ip.sh.

If kubelet is not trying to bind to an IPv6 address, then we don't need to wait for the IPv6 address?

Cursor AI assisted.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rbbratta
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ptalgulk01 for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

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

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

An error occurred during the review process. Please try again later.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

An error occurred during the review process. Please try again later.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[rbbratta]

@cybertron @mko can we use the IPFamilies templating here or only with kubelet?

[openshift-ci]

@rbbratta: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[cybertron]

Would like to see the duplication reduced, but otherwise this makes sense to me.

[cybertron]

I don't really like the duplication here. We can just wrap the individual checks in ifs that look for single stack of the opposite family. I.e.

if ipfamilies != ipv6
  check for ipv4
if ipfamilies != ipv4
  check for ipv6