Loading...

XML

Word

Printable

Type: Bug
Resolution: Unresolved
Priority: Undefined
Fix Version/s: None
Affects Version/s: 4.20
Component/s: Networking / router
Labels:

Activity Type:
None
Blocked:
False
Blocked Reason:

Hide

None

Show
None
Story Points:
None
Severity:
Moderate
Regression:
None

Target Backport Versions:
None
Target Version:
None
Release Blocker:
Rejected
Sprint:
None

SFDC Cases Counter:
SFDC Cases Open:
SFDC Cases Links:

PX Impact Score:

Release Note Status:
None
Release Note Type:
None
Release Note Text:
None

Escape Reason:
None
Escape Impact:
None
Corrective Measures:
None
SDLC stage when should've been found:
None

We have a customer report in RFE-8514 that they're seeing CIO create a second subscription if they have previously installed their OSSM operator in a namespace different than "openshift-operators".

Honestly, while it is possible to change the namespace at install time, we don't really have any tests around that so we're now working on adding tests on the OSSM side. The CIO however should make sure to never create a second OLM subscription for OSSM, even if there is no subscription found in openshift-operators namespace.

is related to

NE-2224 [GWAPI] Don't take over existing OLM subscription for OSSM

NE-2286 [GWAPI] Install and manage Istio without using an OLM subscription

In Progress

is triggering

RFE-8514 Allow OpenShift Service Mesh Operator to Use Custom Namespace and Prevent Duplicate Operator Installations When Enabling GatewayClass

Backlog

Assignee:: NID Team Bot

Reporter:: Daniel Grimm

Need Info From:: None

Contributors:: None

QA Contact:: None

Doc Contact:: None

Votes:: 0 Vote for this issue

Watchers:: 5 Start watching this issue

Created:: 2026/02/11 2:34 PM

Updated:: 2026/02/13 10:50 PM

Details

Description

Attachments

Issue Links

Easy Agile Planning Poker

Activity

People

Dates