Installer: [RFE]: patch terraform dns provider to allow SRV records

[DanyC97]

For folks who are trying to deploy on prem by leveraging the terraform upi code, should they wish to register the DNS records (pre-req) in a local (not R53) DNS server then be aware that terraform dns provider doesn't support SRV records

Terraform community provided a PR but not much interest (yet) from hashicorp and so my ask/ question is: are you happy to include a dns provider fork ( with the above PR included) in the installer ?

Otherwise i think would be nice to document this gap which _is not_ caused by openshift/ RH but 3rd party

/cc @abhinavdahiya @wking @staebler your thoughts ?

[abhinavdahiya]

The installer provide examples for how to create clusters for user-provisioned. The users can use any provider they like, as long the DNS, LB requirements are being fulfilled.

/close

[openshift-ci-robot]

@abhinavdahiya: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

The installer provide examples for how to create clusters for user-provisioned. The users can use any provider they like, as long the DNS, LB requirements are being fulfilled.

/close

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/test-infra repository.

[DanyC97]

The installer provide examples for how to create clusters for user-provisioned. The users can use any provider they like, as long the DNS, LB requirements are being fulfilled.

/close

with all respect @abhinavdahiya you were missing the point here, so let expand a bit (in case you ever read this again) ....

i understand that installer does provides examples for UPIs however this examples are most of the time used by folks coming and exploring how things are being done. It was the case with openshift-ansible-contrib examples and same it was with various cloud provider inventories in 3.x - see here

At the same time, the same examples are your UPI's sale story ( _hey, check this templates and get a working UPI env up_) and as such all i was trying to say was:

1) rather than surprise folks later on with the examples where R53 is a dependency for DNS pre-req maybe you can improve it and remove R53 (even if the 3rd party tool - in this case terraform has a gap)
* now i understand if this is not ideal due to burden on supporting a fork ... so yes i can agree & you can ditch this idea mentioned to pull in the PR code
2) however i think is sensible to add a note here and then here to say that _R53 is a pre-req for the examples; should users need/ want to use a different terraform dns provider, they should check if SRV record type is supported_

P.S - should you consider my 2nd point, i'm happy to send out a PR, let me know