Lb cname #8
Merged
Lb cname #8
+34
−24
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mcgin314
reviewed
Oct 17, 2024
|
For what it is worth, in my experience all I've ever done is create the a record. |
Sign in
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed in PR #7, the data items in the upstream module caused issues with planning. We don't need the heritage records from the aws-dns module either....
digging deeper, it seems we haven't been using cname/alias records. They are different than strict cnames -> https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/resource-record-sets-choosing-alias-non-alias.html
the aws module docs have a note:
Exactly one of records or alias must be specified: this determines whether it's an alias record.in my 15s of research, every place we have created lb cnames we used a cname record, and the module for cname records isn't using alias.
There is a minor cost savings from this - alias record queries are not charged ->
Route 53 doesn't charge for alias queries to AWS resources. For more information, see [Amazon Route 53 Pricing](https://aws.amazon.com/route53/pricing/).Additional information regarding comparison of alias and cname records -> https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/resource-record-sets-choosing-alias-non-alias.html#resource-record-sets-choosing-alias-non-alias-comparison