fix(godday): panic when retryAfter is 0

[rayshoo]

… process

Description

Handles panic when the retryAfter header is parsed as 0 or less or blank when responding 429 from GoDaddy API.

Fixes #ISSUE
This is a code fix for the issue #4864

Checklist

• Unit tests updated
• End user documentation updated

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: rayshoo / name: rayshoo (8a0548b, 67ff232, 7fb8be1)

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

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

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

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @rayshoo!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/external-dns 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/external-dns has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @rayshoo. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[mloiseleur]

Thanks for this PR.
Would you please add some tests on this ?

[mloiseleur]

/retitle fix(godday): panic when retryAfter is 0

[mloiseleur]

Fixes #4864

[rayshoo]

Is it correct to add the test code to the provider/godaddy/godaddy_test.go file?
Actually I am not very experienced in writing test code.
I will try to understand and write as much as I can, but I don't know how long it will take.
It would be nice if there was a gopher around that could help me, but unfortunately there isn't one other than me.. :(
Still, I think this could be another experience, so I'll give it a try when I have time. thank you!

[mloiseleur]

Is it correct to add the test code to the provider/godaddy/godaddy_test.go file?

Yes it is.

Actually I am not very experienced in writing test code.

This step is clearly mandatory. It's not that difficult, you will see :).

[mloiseleur]

In go, developers prefer readability.
Would you please rewrite this code with this pesudo pattern:

retryAfter = 30
receivedValue := resp.Header.Get("Retry-After")
if receivedValue != "" {
  // [...]
  retryAfter = somethingElse
}

[rayshoo]

Based on your review, I modified the code and made it more concise while maintaining the default value of 30. thank you!

[rayshoo]

@mloiseleur As I wringing the test code, I took a closer look at the code as a whole. I realized that even if I take care to prevent an error from occurring in Client.Do, the status code value is 429, so the subsequent function, UnmarshalResponse, returns an error, which leads to log.Fatal(err) in the main function and terminates the server.

Therefore, if I receive a 429 error within the client.
Repeat the process with an appropriate interval, it is expected that will be able to return 200 and exit the loop when the quota is released. (I don't know if the godaddy server will like this. I think we need an interval setting that can be mutually agreed upon.)

// provider/godaddy/client.go:224
func (c *Client) Do(req *http.Request) (*http.Response, error) {
	// [...]
	resp, err := c.Client.Do(req)
	/*
	Before
	for i := 1; i < 3 && err == nil && resp.StatusCode == 429; i++ {
	*/
	// After
	for err == nil && resp.StatusCode == 429 {
	// [...]

Also, during this time, I think the readiness probe needs to be taken down to tell Kubernetes that the server is not ready.

// somePackage/someFilename.go
var Ready bool = true

// provider/godaddy/client.go:224
func (c *Client) Do(req *http.Request) (*http.Response, error) {
	for err == nil && resp.StatusCode == 429 {
		somePackage.Ready = false
	// [...]
	}
	somePackage.Ready = true

// main.go:447
func serveMetrics(address string) {
	http.HandleFunc("/live", func(w http.ResponseWriter, _ *http.Request) {
		w.WriteHeader(http.StatusOK)
		w.Write([]byte("OK"))
	})
	http.HandleFunc("/ready", func(w http.ResponseWriter, _ *http.Request) {
		if somePackage.Ready {
			w.WriteHeader(http.StatusOK)
			w.Write([]byte("OK"))
		} else {
			w.WriteHeader(http.StatusPreconditionRequired)
			w.Write([]byte("NOT READY"))
		}
	})
}

However, this level of code requires more modifications than initially thought, so I don't know if it is desirable. I wrote my opinion carefully.