You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now you associate a subnet to a network ACL which seems backward to me. You can have multiple subnets sharing the same network ACL. This is pretty common for setting up a multi-AZ infrastructure where servers live in different subnets that live in separate AZs.
It creates a lot of un-needed duplication to create network acl per subnet.
I found #1735 which was closed but seems like he is asking the same thing. I'd be fine with allowing a list of subnets on the acl resource.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.
ghost
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
May 2, 2020
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Right now you associate a subnet to a network ACL which seems backward to me. You can have multiple subnets sharing the same network ACL. This is pretty common for setting up a multi-AZ infrastructure where servers live in different subnets that live in separate AZs.
It creates a lot of un-needed duplication to create network acl per subnet.
I found #1735 which was closed but seems like he is asking the same thing. I'd be fine with allowing a list of subnets on the acl resource.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: