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

Make the ELB name conform to cloud providers rules #7148

Closed
caesarxuchao opened this issue Apr 22, 2015 · 1 comment
Closed

Make the ELB name conform to cloud providers rules #7148

caesarxuchao opened this issue Apr 22, 2015 · 1 comment
Labels
priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest priority. Possibly useful, but not yet enough support to actually get it done.

Comments

@caesarxuchao
Copy link
Member

Cloud providers have various rules regarding the naming of a load balancer. Here are links to the rules of GCE (https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/load-balancing/network/target-pools) and AWS(http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ElasticLoadBalancing/latest/APIReference/API_CreateLoadBalancer.html).

Currently we have made sure the names returned by GetLoadBalancerName will satisfy the rules of GCE and AWS. In the future, we need to make this function more flexible so that different naming rules can be forced.

Related: #7145 #6812

@caesarxuchao caesarxuchao added priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest priority. Possibly useful, but not yet enough support to actually get it done. team/cluster labels Apr 22, 2015
@justinsb
Copy link
Member

I think we can close this? At least on AWS, we now create the ELB with a name derived from the service UUID, so we can guarantee we meet the rules, whatever name the user chooses.

I think this is the pattern other clouds use/should use also. Closing, but feel free to reopen if not...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest priority. Possibly useful, but not yet enough support to actually get it done.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants