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

feat(route53): RecordSet routing policy properties, HeathCheck #4413

Closed
wants to merge 24 commits into from

Conversation

nmussy
Copy link
Contributor

@nmussy nmussy commented Oct 8, 2019

  • RecordSet routing policy properties
  • HealthCheck constructs
    • EndpointHealthCheck for IP and DNS health checks
    • AlarmHealthCheck for CloudWatch alarm health checks
    • CalculatedHealthCheck for health checks checking the health of other health checks
  • export existing IP validation regular expression from aws-ec2

TODO:

  • Fix awslint errors due to base HealthCheck class
  • Create higher level record generation methods? (see comment)
  • Fix HealthCheck tag generation
  • Clarify if region: Aws.REGION is sufficient for AlarmHealthCheck CloudWatch alarms
  • Health check integration tests?

Fixes #4391


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Oct 8, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@nmussy nmussy changed the title feat(route53): add missing L2 RecordSet properties feat(route53): RecordSet routing policy properties, HeathCheck Oct 8, 2019
@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@nmussy
Copy link
Contributor Author

nmussy commented Oct 8, 2019

It might be interesting to add static methods (one per routing policy type) to build multiple records for the same setIdentifier (which could be auto-generated?). Something like:

public static generateFailoverRecords(primary: RecordSetOptions, secondary: RecordSetOptions)
public static generateWeightedRecords(...weightedRecords: RecordSetOptions & {weight: number})
// ...

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

const healthCheck = new CfnHealthCheck(this, 'Resource', { healthCheckConfig: props });
this.healthCheckId = healthCheck.ref;
}
}
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

awslint really doesn't like what I'm doing there. What would be the expected pattern?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what did it complain about?

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@nmussy nmussy marked this pull request as ready for review October 9, 2019 13:10
@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@shivlaks
Copy link
Contributor

hey @nmussy - will start taking a look at this one tomorrow. Any high level feedback you'd like specifically while you work through your TODO list?

It might also help to separate the routing policy change (which addresses the issue referenced) and the HealthCheck constructs in separate PRs. but up to you!

@nmussy
Copy link
Contributor Author

nmussy commented Oct 16, 2019

Hey @shivlaks,

That "todo list" should really be a "help me list" 😄. The biggest design decision is whether or not to add higher level L2 methods (which I think we should).

As for splitting the PR, I agree, it feels a little unnecessary to throw HealthCheck in there now, HealthCheck isn't required by the routing polices yet. However, if we do add those generateX methods, some of them might require a health check (e.g. generateFailoverRecords). The new health check PR would then block this one. So it's up to you, I don't mind either way.

@NGL321 NGL321 added pr/work-in-progress This PR is a draft and needs further work. help wanted We are asking the community to submit a PR to resolve this issue. labels Oct 17, 2019
@geekybaiyi
Copy link

any idea when this PR will be merged?
thx!

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

5 similar comments
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 16, 2019

Thanks so much for taking the time to contribute to the AWS CDK ❤️

We will shortly assign someone to review this pull request and help get it
merged. In the meantime, please take a minute to make sure you follow this
checklist
:

  • PR title type(scope): text
    • type: fix, feat, refactor go into CHANGELOG, chore is hidden
    • scope: name of module without aws- or cdk- prefix or postfix (e.g. s3 instead of aws-s3-deployment)
    • text: use all lower-case, do not end with a period, do not include issue refs
  • PR Description
    • Rationale: describe rationale of change and approach taken
    • Issues: indicate issues fixed via: fixes #xxx or closes #xxx
    • Breaking?: last paragraph: BREAKING CHANGE: <describe what changed + link for details>
  • Testing
    • Unit test added. Prefer to add a new test rather than modify existing tests
    • CLI or init templates change? Re-run/add CLI integration tests
  • Documentation
    • README: update module README to describe new features
    • API docs: public APIs must be documented. Copy from official AWS docs when possible
    • Design: for significant features, follow design process

Copy link
Contributor

@shivlaks shivlaks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

still have todo list to work through for this PR, I can start taking a look later this week.

@@ -451,3 +594,54 @@ export class ZoneDelegationRecord extends RecordSet {
});
}
}

/**
* Contient code
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

minor: typo on Continent

const healthCheck = new CfnHealthCheck(this, 'Resource', { healthCheckConfig: props });
this.healthCheckId = healthCheck.ref;
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what did it complain about?

@shivlaks
Copy link
Contributor

closing this PR as it's stale to reflect that this task is available to pick up on the issue. PR can be reopened or a new one can be published in it's place.

@shivlaks shivlaks closed this Mar 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted We are asking the community to submit a PR to resolve this issue. pr/work-in-progress This PR is a draft and needs further work.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

support routing policy setting for ARecord class
5 participants