Skip to content
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

resource-name based hostnames #906

Closed
james-callahan opened this issue Mar 9, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #838
Closed

resource-name based hostnames #906

james-callahan opened this issue Mar 9, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #838

Comments

@james-callahan
Copy link

james-callahan commented Mar 9, 2023

This is reopening the closed+locked issues:

Is your request related to a new offering from AWS?

Yes (well; it was, but not really new any more), AWS v3.71.0 added support for private_dns_hostname_type_on_launch to the subnet resource.

Is your request related to a problem? Please describe.

Yes: I want to be able to launch an aws_instance with attached network devices with resource-name based hostnames.
This is currently broken in the provider with the recommended workaround of turning it on by default on the subnet. But this terraform module doesn't expose that option.

Describe the solution you'd like.

Add private_dns_hostname_type_on_launch argument

Describe alternatives you've considered.

Additional context

AWS allows changing the hostname scheme from the legacy ip-based naming to resource-based naming. More info available here

On the provider side this was exposed as private_dns_hostname_type_on_launch

I expect that resource-name based hostnames should eventually be the default going forward, as the previous scheme isn't suitable for an IPv6 world.

@zen
Copy link

zen commented Mar 15, 2023

This is also an issue with new versions of kOps - resource based hostnames are required.

I think I might find some time. This looks quite a simple change.

@antonbabenko
Copy link
Member

This issue has been resolved in version 4.0.0 🎉

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2023

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.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 8, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants