-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
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
feat(ecs-patterns): add option to create cname instead of alias record #10812
Conversation
@uttarasridhar Hi, do you see any chance we can get this merged? I have a client that cannot use the patterns module because of this. |
* Specifies whether the Route53 record should be a CNAME or an A record using the Alias feature. | ||
* This is useful if you need to work with DNS systems that do not support alias records. |
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.
I think it would be better to create an issue to describe why we need this feature and link this PR to that issue.
The PR LGTM from code perspective. I just don't understand the scenario. Will be great to elaborate it in the issue.
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.
copy @iamhopaul123
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.
Yeah agree with @pahud, could you create an issue elaborating the use case that this PR mainly addresses? It would also increase visibility for the other users with similar problem.
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.
The implementation looks great to me! A couple of questions though:
- Could you enable this feature in our NLB patterns as well, since we want to keep feature parity if it makes sense.
- Would you mind to manually test it works when users specify
ALIAS
/CNAME
/NONE
?
I added the feature to NLBs and tested it locally |
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.
🚢
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). |
@Mergifyio update |
@hoegertn is not allowed to run commands |
@Mergifyio update |
Command
|
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). |
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license