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

Implement support for various AWS ELB cookie stickiness policies #1685

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 29, 2015

Conversation

ctiwald
Copy link
Contributor

@ctiwald ctiwald commented Apr 26, 2015

Implements support for LB cookie stickiness policies and app cookie stickiness policies. These features aren't listed in #28 but could be. These commits also fulfill the request in #656.

ctiwald added 6 commits April 26, 2015 18:05
This resource represents a session stickiness policy in AWS, and can be
applied to an ELB's client-facing listeners.
This resource represents a session stickiness policy in AWS, and can be
applied to an ELB's client-facing listeners.
@ctiwald ctiwald changed the title Implement support for AWS LB cookie stickiness policies Implement support for various AWS ELB cookie stickiness policies Apr 26, 2015
@CheRuisiBesares
Copy link

I would love to see this merged in.

@ctiwald
Copy link
Contributor Author

ctiwald commented Apr 27, 2015

Poking around a bit after I got worried this morning -- this code should also weather the situation where the ELB is deleted before the policy. Neither elb.SetLoadBalancerPoliciesOfListener nor elb.DeleteLoadBalancerPolicy will error if the policy doesn't exist. AWS's somewhat irrational API means we don't have to manage the dependency.

@mitchellh
Copy link
Contributor

Really fantastic work. This is perfect, and you did docs. Greatttttt job! Thanks.

mitchellh added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2015
provider/aws: Implement support for various AWS ELB cookie stickiness policies
@mitchellh mitchellh merged commit d354cae into hashicorp:master Apr 29, 2015
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 3, 2020

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 ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 3, 2020
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants