-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
provider/azurerm: network interfaces and public IP support. #4473
Conversation
Optional: true, | ||
}, | ||
|
||
"ip_config": &schema.Schema{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@phinze: concerning your suggestions to move some of these sub-resources to the top-level: in this particular case, and I'd suspect many more, Creating a network interface without defining at least one such IP configuration leads to a 400.
Also, as I'll point out in the test config; most of these sub-resources have id
fields as well and can/must be used in conjunction with other resource/sub-resources.
As such; we may be able to get away with separating some resources; but most will likely turn out impractical to separate.
2019ac8
to
b4419ac
Compare
ip_config = { | ||
name = "acceptanceTestIpConfiguration1" | ||
dynamic_private_ip = true | ||
# TODO: subnet_id = "${azurerm_virtual_network.test.subnet.HASH.id}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
NOTE for when we add subnets...
See you on the other side boys 😄 |
b4419ac
to
b896dfe
Compare
Hi all, @stack72 ended up implementing these resources #4565 and #4598, which were subsequently merged, so I'll close this pull request now. Thanks for your work @aznashwan! |
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. |
❗ Not to be merged yet! ❗
Considering the two resource go hand in hand so well together, this PR aims to bring support for both ARM network interfaces and public IPs.
@phinze @jen20: do please glance over the observations I'll leave on the diff; some of them address your proposal from back off load balancer PR (#4343).
PS: for general continuity; this PR was branched from the local network gateways PR (#4342), so please feel free to ignore those files.