feat(ec2): rename SubnetTypes to improve clarity with EC2 conventions #16348
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Early on in the CDK history, a decision was made to delineate between subnets with Internet access (i.e., those with a NAT) and those without. The convention chosen at that time was to label the subnets as `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED`, respectively. The intent was to make it clear that subnets without a NAT were completely isolated from the broader Internet (unless connected through another subnet). However, this introduction of a new subnet type that does not match EC2 documentation and naming conventions can cause confusion. Most critically, a user may select a `PRIVATE` subnet without realizing that it automatically requires one (or more) NAT gateways. As NAT gateways are not free, this can lead to unintended charges. To realign to the EC2 terminology -- while retaining the existing logic surrounding SubnetTypes -- the existing types of `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED` are being renamed to `PRIVATE_WITH_NAT` and `PRIVATE_ISOLATED`, respectively. fixes #15929
|
|
Co-authored-by: Elad Ben-Israel <benisrae@amazon.com>
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
TikiTDO
pushed a commit
to TikiTDO/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 6, 2021
…aws#16348) Early on in the CDK history, a decision was made to delineate between subnets with Internet access (i.e., those with a NAT) and those without. The convention chosen at that time was to label the subnets as `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED`, respectively. The intent was to make it clear that subnets without a NAT were completely isolated from the broader Internet (unless connected through another subnet). However, this introduction of a new subnet type that does not match EC2 documentation and naming conventions can cause confusion. Most critically, a user may select a `PRIVATE` subnet without realizing that it automatically requires one (or more) NAT gateways. As NAT gateways are not free, this can lead to unintended charges. To realign to the EC2 terminology -- while retaining the existing logic surrounding SubnetTypes -- the existing types of `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED` are being renamed to `PRIVATE_WITH_NAT` and `PRIVATE_ISOLATED`, respectively. fixes aws#15929 ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
david-doyle-as24
pushed a commit
to david-doyle-as24/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2021
…aws#16348) Early on in the CDK history, a decision was made to delineate between subnets with Internet access (i.e., those with a NAT) and those without. The convention chosen at that time was to label the subnets as `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED`, respectively. The intent was to make it clear that subnets without a NAT were completely isolated from the broader Internet (unless connected through another subnet). However, this introduction of a new subnet type that does not match EC2 documentation and naming conventions can cause confusion. Most critically, a user may select a `PRIVATE` subnet without realizing that it automatically requires one (or more) NAT gateways. As NAT gateways are not free, this can lead to unintended charges. To realign to the EC2 terminology -- while retaining the existing logic surrounding SubnetTypes -- the existing types of `PRIVATE` and `ISOLATED` are being renamed to `PRIVATE_WITH_NAT` and `PRIVATE_ISOLATED`, respectively. fixes aws#15929 ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Early on in the CDK history, a decision was made to delineate between subnets
with Internet access (i.e., those with a NAT) and those without. The convention
chosen at that time was to label the subnets as
PRIVATEandISOLATED,respectively. The intent was to make it clear that subnets without a NAT were
completely isolated from the broader Internet (unless connected through another
subnet).
However, this introduction of a new subnet type that does not match EC2
documentation and naming conventions can cause confusion. Most critically, a
user may select a
PRIVATEsubnet without realizing that it automaticallyrequires one (or more) NAT gateways. As NAT gateways are not free, this can
lead to unintended charges.
To realign to the EC2 terminology -- while retaining the existing logic
surrounding SubnetTypes -- the existing types of
PRIVATEandISOLATEDarebeing renamed to
PRIVATE_WITH_NATandPRIVATE_ISOLATED, respectively.fixes #15929
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license