AWS SDK Go V2 Upgrade of ELB and ELBv2

[gargipanatula]

Upgrading the ELB and ELBv2 packages of the AWS SDK Go V2.

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
The AWS SDK Go V1 is being deprecated on July 31, 2025. This PR migrates usage of the ELB and ELBV2 SDK to use V2.
Context: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/developer/announcing-end-of-support-for-aws-sdk-for-go-v1-on-july-31-2025/

Ports over ELB and ELBV2 client creation to V2 supported middleware created in #1146.

No major changes to the functionality, but some superficial changes include the switch from int64 to int32, to match the values used by the ELB and ELBV2 packages, and the use of enums (e.g. ProtocolEnum, ActionTypeEnum) over raw strings.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

Testing:
Ran unit tests (via make test). Ran e2e tests with the following commands:

export KUBECONFIG=<kubeconfig path>
export AWS_REGION=us-west-2
export TEST_PATH=./tests/e2e/...
export GINKGO_NODES=4
export GINKGO_FOCUS=[cloud-provider-aws-e2e]
export GINGKO_SKIP=[Disruptive]
go install github.com/onsi/ginkgo/ginkgo@v1.14.0
export PATH=$PATH:$HOME/go/bin
pushd ./tests/e2e
ginkgo . -v -p --nodes=$GINKGO_NODES --focus=$GINKGO_FOCUS --skip=$GINKGO_SKIP

<...test output...>
Ran 3 of 3 Specs in 69.045 seconds
SUCCESS! -- 3 Passed | 0 Failed | 0 Pending | 0 Skipped
--- PASS: TestE2E (69.05s)
PASS

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If cloud-provider-aws contributors determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @gargipanatula. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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.

[yue9944882]

looks like this string compare change is non-trivial. do we know why we need EqualFold in v1?

[gargipanatula]

The values we're comparing here are now both enums, whereas before they were strings. AFAIK this removes the need to worry about casing, hence why EqualFold was removed.

More enums are supported by V2, so that's why I changed structs to use enums wherever possible.

[yue9944882]

can we link the original v1 implementation either in the code comment or here?

[yue9944882]

nit: opts := []func(*elb.Options) {... ...} instead of appending one-by-one. each append is a malloc op under the hood

[gargipanatula]

Oh I see, do you mean something like this:

var opts []func(*ec2.Options) = p.cfg.GetEC2EndpointOpts(regionName)
	opts = append(opts, func(o *ec2.Options) {
		o.Retryer = &customRetryer{
			retry.NewStandard(),
		}
		o.EndpointResolverV2 = p.cfg.GetCustomEC2Resolver()
	})

Couldn't figure out how spread p.cfg.GetELBEndpointOpts(regionName) into a composite literal ([]func(*elb.Options){ ... }), let me know if i'm missing something

[yue9944882]

var opts []func(*ec2.Options) = append(
         p.cfg.GetEC2EndpointOpts(regionName),
	 func(o *ec2.Options) {
		o.Retryer = &customRetryer{
			retry.NewStandard(),
		}
		o.EndpointResolverV2 = p.cfg.GetCustomEC2Resolver()
	})

i was thinking about an oneliner like this

[kmala]

EqualFold is not case sensitive, should we still keep it?

[gargipanatula]

I took it out because the values we're comparing are now both enums of type elb.ProtocolEnum, whereas before they were strings. AFAIK we don't need to worry about casing anymore but if there is an edge case I should be aware of then I can put it back in.

[kmala]

ProtocolEnum is just a string type and doesn't mandate specific values, since we are converting the string to ProtocolEnum for mapping.HealthCheckConfig.Protocol i think its possible for it value to be just http and hence would fail the check

[gargipanatula]

I see, ok in that case I'll add the EqualFold back in. Thanks for the catch!

[kmala]

/ok-to-test

[kmala]

/lgtm

[gargipanatula]

/retest

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: haoranleo, yue9944882
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from kmala. 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

[kmala]

/approve