fix(crd): require trailing dot for SRV targets

[alexbakker-quandago]

What does it do ?

This brings the CRD validation of SRV record targets in line with the ValidateSRVRecord function in endpoint/endpoint.go, which was changed in fde978f to require a trailing dot.

Motivation

Fixes #6357.

More

• Yes, this PR title follows Conventional Commits
• Yes, I added unit tests
• Yes, I updated end user documentation accordingly

[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 szuecs 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

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @alexbakker-quandago. 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.

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.

[ivankatliarchuk]

/ok-to-test

[ivankatliarchuk]

Could you add integration test as well pls https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns/blob/master/tests/integration/scenarios/tests.yaml

[coveralls]

Coverage Report for CI Build 24122217084

Coverage remained the same at 80.528%

Details

• Coverage remained the same as the base build.
• Patch coverage: No coverable lines changed in this PR.
• No coverage regressions found.

Uncovered Changes

No uncovered changes found.

Coverage Regressions

No coverage regressions found.

---

Coverage Stats

Relevant Lines:	21308
Covered Lines:	17159
Line Coverage:	80.53%
Coverage Strength:	1471.39 hits per line

---

💛 - Coveralls

[alexbakker-quandago]

@ivankatliarchuk Could you provide an example of an integration test with DNSEndpoint? As far as I can tell, this is currently not supported by the framework:

external-dns/tests/integration/toolkit/models.go

Lines 71 to 77 in a770f18

	// ParsedResources holds the parsed Kubernetes resources from a scenario.
	type ParsedResources struct {
	Ingresses []*networkingv1.Ingress
	Services []*corev1.Service
	EndpointSlices []*discoveryv1.EndpointSlice
	Pods []*corev1.Pod
	}

[ivankatliarchuk]

@ivankatliarchuk Could you provide an example of an integration test with DNSEndpoint? As far as I can tell, this is currently not supported by the framework:

external-dns/tests/integration/toolkit/models.go

Lines 71 to 77 in a770f18

	// ParsedResources holds the parsed Kubernetes resources from a scenario.
	type ParsedResources struct {
	Ingresses []*networkingv1.Ingress
	Services []*corev1.Service
	EndpointSlices []*discoveryv1.EndpointSlice
	Pods []*corev1.Pod
	}

Yeah. Too much work. I'll do it it

[alexbakker-quandago]

@ivankatliarchuk Thanks for the feedback. I've addressed both of your comments.

[ivankatliarchuk]

Could you provide a similar ressult #5111 (comment)

I think we did get a working result on last PR, no idea how there is still a bug.

[alexbakker-quandago]

@ivankatliarchuk In #6357 you can find steps to reproduce the issue. This should be reproducible regardless of any external-dns settings.

I think I now also understand when the issue was introduced, see: #6357 (comment)