You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When I first saw the SecurityGroupId export in this package, it seemed to be the solution I wanted for alb-listener. To make alb-listener do what I want in that issue, it would need to expose the ALB's Security Group so I could come back and add rules for it later.
In this case, a Security Group is created and ingress rules are attached, but there's no obvious way that the Security Group is used. I understand NLBs don't have their own security groups (like ALBs do) so a group like this would need to be attached to the target of the connection.
It isn't obvious how that's supposed to happen. I eventually figured out that you could pass this module to fargate-service as ClientSgModule1 and the SG would be attached to the Service, but only because I'm increasingly familiar with these templates.
At minimum, it seems like this template should share the ExposeSecurityGroupId interface with client-sg. Per my interfaces issue, of course, I'd prefer an interface name that is more use-oriented like SecurityGroupProvider or ServiceContainerSg. This would disambiguate it from other uses of the SecurityGroupId like Ingress or Egress. Symmetrically, I'd rename ClientSgModule1 to SecurityGroupProviderModule1 so it was obvious that this package could (in fact should) be used there. It also make sense to mention (in this README) that it should be passed there.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
P.S. If the export was named TargetSg, it would have been obvious to look at the Target interface (or consumers of the Target interface) to see its use.
When I first saw the
SecurityGroupId
export in this package, it seemed to be the solution I wanted foralb-listener
. To makealb-listener
do what I want in that issue, it would need to expose the ALB's Security Group so I could come back and add rules for it later.In this case, a Security Group is created and ingress rules are attached, but there's no obvious way that the Security Group is used. I understand NLBs don't have their own security groups (like ALBs do) so a group like this would need to be attached to the target of the connection.
It isn't obvious how that's supposed to happen. I eventually figured out that you could pass this module to
fargate-service
asClientSgModule1
and the SG would be attached to the Service, but only because I'm increasingly familiar with these templates.At minimum, it seems like this template should share the
ExposeSecurityGroupId
interface withclient-sg
. Per my interfaces issue, of course, I'd prefer an interface name that is more use-oriented likeSecurityGroupProvider
orServiceContainerSg
. This would disambiguate it from other uses of theSecurityGroupId
likeIngress
orEgress
. Symmetrically, I'd renameClientSgModule1
toSecurityGroupProviderModule1
so it was obvious that this package could (in fact should) be used there. It also make sense to mention (in this README) that it should be passed there.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: