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

Option to Enable Azure Monitor Agent (AMA) initiave #1055

Closed
rikunarhi-cloud2 opened this issue Sep 23, 2022 · 15 comments
Closed

Option to Enable Azure Monitor Agent (AMA) initiave #1055

rikunarhi-cloud2 opened this issue Sep 23, 2022 · 15 comments
Assignees
Labels
engineering engineering work enhancement New feature or request policy

Comments

@rikunarhi-cloud2
Copy link

rikunarhi-cloud2 commented Sep 23, 2022

Community Note

  • Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
  • Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
  • If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Description

Is your feature request related to a problem?

We are starting to transfer our monitoring agents from the old Log analytics agent to the AMA. Currently the option settings.log_analytics.config.enable_monitoring_for_vm deploys a legacy policy.

Now if we want to create our own Data collection rules we will have to create them outside of the module.

Describe the solution you'd like

We would like to have the settings.log_analytics.config.enable_monitoring_for_vm to deploy the new policy 9dffaf29-5905-4145-883c-957eb442c226.

Second option would be the ability to create Data collection rules with the advanced block of the configuremanagementresources. So that then we can deploy a policy that just installs the agent and associates the agent with the data collection rule.

Additional context

@ghost ghost added the Needs: Triage 🔍 Needs triaging by the team label Sep 23, 2022
@jtracey93 jtracey93 transferred this issue from Azure/terraform-azurerm-caf-enterprise-scale Sep 23, 2022
@jtracey93 jtracey93 added enhancement New feature or request policy engineering engineering work and removed Needs: Triage 🔍 Needs triaging by the team labels Sep 23, 2022
@jtracey93
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for raising this @rikunarhi-cloud2,

I have transferred this to this repo as all our policies live as a source of truth in this repo and then pulled into Terraform or Bicep implementations.

We are currently working with the Azure Monitor engineering teams to plan the migration of ALZ from MMA to AMA and are nearing the point where we can begin the required work, but not just yet.

@paulgrimley is leading this from our side as a PM, so looping him in.

As a side note we are working with the engineering teams to get this previously raised policy issue resolved #1033 before we start with the AMA migration work as this will impact a number of customers if we just migrated today due to hardcoded eastus deployment location of the managed identity.

So, stay tuned and now we are working on this behind the scenes and hope to make it come to reality very soon.

Thanks

Jack

@jtracey93 jtracey93 pinned this issue Sep 23, 2022
@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

@rikunarhi-cloud2 thanks for raising this, we are indeed in deep discussions (and have been for some time) with the Monitor PG on transitioning ALZ to AMA. I am hopeful we should see progress in the next few weeks as we're keen to get this switched over.

@rikunarhi-cloud2
Copy link
Author

What is the status of this?

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @rikunarhi-cloud2 we are still working with Monitor PG who are finalising date for GA parity with MMA before we are able to switch to AMA. The ALZ team are working in the background in readiness for GA so we can determine what is needed to be updated for each of the reference implementations (Portal, Bicep and Terraform).

@spotakash
Copy link

spotakash commented Feb 16, 2023

Eagerly Waiting.
Or Shall we move ahead archetype_extension using Policy that work today?

@jtracey93
Copy link
Collaborator

@spotakash you can indeed add it manually yourself in the TF module using the archetype_extension, but we are using this feature to track the addition/migration to AMA from MMA and all the other work this encompasses. Docs, guidance, policy work, implementation changes.

As Paul has mentioned there is work going on with the AMA teams to ensure we have everything aligned and in place for parity, then we will begin our work.

@JasperCodes
Copy link

is there any progress on this? We can't postpone this migration much longer and we'd prefer if this was implemented in Enterprise-Scale/ALZ policies instead of our own custom policy implementation.

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

paulgrimley commented Oct 12, 2023

Appreciate you requesting an update on this @JasperCodes, we are continuing to work in the background to drive this forward and this relies on a number of teams who leverage the MMA agent providing parity general availability alternatives to allow ALZ to transition to the AMA agent as we need to cater for all our customers who will use different components of the MMA solution so its not easy to just switch over with some services announced as GA for AMA. Defender for Cloud is one of the biggest users of the AMA agent and new GA comparable coverage (of solutions that ALZ currently deploy today) vs MMA is at least April 2024 as per https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/microsoft-defender-for-cloud/microsoft-defender-for-cloud-strategy-and-plan-towards-log/ba-p/3883341.

My recommendation would be to look at what components your organisation uses and determine if AMA could be leveraged (and services are GA) and would recommend raising a support ticket if you have further concerns against services you require that are not GA with the pending deprecation date approaching if needed.

@vegazbabz
Copy link

Any news / progress around this to migrate to the built-in initiatives? Thanks

“Enable Azure Monitor for VMs” should be updated to point to the correct built-in policy initiative:
Enable Azure Monitor for VMs with Azure Monitoring Agent(AMA) - 924bfe3a-762f-40e7-86dd-5c8b95eb09e6

“Enable Azure Monitor for Virtual Machine Scale Sets” instead of “Enable Azure Monitor for Virtual Machine Scale Sets”
Enable Azure Monitor for VMSS with Azure Monitoring Agent(AMA) - f5bf694c-cca7-4033-b883-3a23327d5485

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

We're actively working on this, we plan to have the portal updated to use AMA in the next few days then we will review how to integrate this with our Terraform and Bicep reference implementations. Please check the roadmap for updates aka.ms/alz/roadmap (I have just made an update to the MMA deprecation item https://github.com/orgs/Azure/projects/487?pane=issue&itemId=30803412) cc: @arjenhuitema

@jimays-avila
Copy link

Is there a timeline for supporting AMA being supported in Terraform implementation?

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @jimays-avila thanks for the nudge and the short answer is yes! all going well we are planning for June. Please see https://github.com/orgs/Azure/projects/487?pane=issue&itemId=30803412 for more details in our roadmap updates.

@eddy-vera
Copy link

@paulgrimley: Would this be more at the beginning or end of June? We have been eagerly waiting for this, as the 31st August is nearby. Thanks in advance for your reply.

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

paulgrimley commented May 23, 2024

@eddy-vera to be safe I would say end of June, we are working hard to get this out so can assure you we are doing all we can to get this out as quick as possible, thank you for your patience with this.

@paulgrimley
Copy link
Contributor

Closing this issue as we have now completed this work please visit https://aka.ms/alz/ama/blog for more information

cc: @arjenhuitema

@jtracey93 jtracey93 unpinned this issue Jul 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
engineering engineering work enhancement New feature or request policy
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants