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(ec2): support NAT instances, AMI lookups #4898

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 11, 2019
Merged

Conversation

rix0rrr
Copy link
Contributor

@rix0rrr rix0rrr commented Nov 7, 2019

Add support for NAT instances (as opposed to NAT gateways) on VPCs. This
change introduces the concept of a 'NAT provider', and provides two
implementations out of the box: one for gateways, one for instances.

Instances are not guarded against termination; a future implementation
should use ASGs to make sure there are always instances running.

To make it easier to pick the right AMI for the NAT instance,
add an AMI context provider, which will look up AMIs available to
the user.

Fixes #4876.


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

Add support for NAT instances (as opposed to NAT gateways) on VPCs. This
change introduces the concept of a 'NAT provider', and provides two
implementations out of the box: one for gateways, one for instances.

Instances are not guarded against termination; a future implementation
should use ASGs to make sure there are always instances running.

To make it easier to pick the right AMI for the NAT instance,
add an AMI context provider, which will look up AMIs available to
the user.

Fixes #4876.
@rix0rrr rix0rrr self-assigned this Nov 7, 2019
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Nov 7, 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

@rix0rrr rix0rrr added the pr/do-not-merge This PR should not be merged at this time. label Nov 7, 2019
@rix0rrr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rix0rrr commented Nov 7, 2019

I explicitly pushed out the CX API protocol bump a couple of versions. I don't expect to merge this before the next release (maybe the one after that).

@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

@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

Copy link
Contributor

@eladb eladb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow! When did you do this??

* If you have a specific AMI ID you want to use, pass a `GenericLinuxImage`. For example:
*
* ```ts
* NatProvider.instance({
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@example?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeeahhhh... not a big fan of @example. But I suppose I could.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Examples please!!!

/**
* Instance type of the NAT instance
*/
readonly instanceType: InstanceType;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

default?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not optional.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's make it optional and pick a sensible default, no?

* Select between NAT gateways or NAT instances. NAT gateways
* may not be available in all AWS regions.
*
* @default - NatProvider.gateway()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If you have a concrete value (NatProvider.gateway()) you should use it instead of -, no?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, you are right.

@@ -69,6 +69,11 @@ export function upgradeAssemblyManifest(manifest: AssemblyManifest): AssemblyMan
manifest = justUpgradeVersion(manifest, '1.16.0');
}

if (manifest.version === '1.16.0') {
// Added AMI context provider
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

a note why it is "safe" to upgrade

@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

* evict the value from the cache using the `cdk context` command. See
* https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cdk/latest/guide/context.html for more information.
*/
export class LookupMachineImage implements IMachineImage {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe we need to get this documented under the 'Context Methods' section in here

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch.

@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

@SomayaB SomayaB added the contribution/core This is a PR that came from AWS. label Nov 8, 2019
@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

@rix0rrr rix0rrr merged commit dca9a24 into master Nov 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
contribution/core This is a PR that came from AWS. pr/do-not-merge This PR should not be merged at this time.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Subnet validation inhibits use of NAT instances
6 participants