Skip to content

NetworkACl update#447

Closed
tiffanyachen wants to merge 18 commits intoAzure:kv2018from
tiffanyachen:kv2018
Closed

NetworkACl update#447
tiffanyachen wants to merge 18 commits intoAzure:kv2018from
tiffanyachen:kv2018

Conversation

@tiffanyachen
Copy link

Added networkAcl updates

@tiffanyachen
Copy link
Author

Sorry - missed this one bit.

@tiffanyachen
Copy link
Author

@anuchandy @milismsft Could one of you take a quick look?

Copy link
Member

@anuchandy anuchandy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tiffanyachen since previous PR was squashed and merged, you need to create a new branch from upstream kv2018, add network acl feature, and open a PR from that branch to upstream kv2018

* @return the networkAcls value
*/
@Beta(SinceVersion.V1_11_0)
NetworkRuleSet networkAcls();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tiffanyachen In Fluent we try to avoid using acronyms especially when these are not needed. In this the method can be replaced with "networkRuleSet()". It's also consistent with a similar class found in Storage management library.

* @param networkAcls the networkAcls value to set
* @return the next stage of key vault definition
*/
WithCreate withNetworkAcls(NetworkRuleSet networkAcls);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tiffanyachen Please rename this to "withNetworkRuleSet()". Also in Java we try to avoid passing a whole complex object that needs to be built aside and instead we "decompose" them in place into a sequence of "with...()" methods corresponding to each member of the class that can be set. Think of it similar to setting the AccessPolicy.

Copy link
Member

@anuchandy anuchandy May 15, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems the key vault NetworkRuleSet is EXACTLY same as storage account network rule set. Customer will have consistent experience If we can ensure key vault nw ruleset experience is same as that storage provide.

Storage:

KeyVault:

Take a look at this “stage” in storage account definition

and this “stage” in storage account update

Also this helper https://github.com/Azure/azure-libraries-for-java/blob/kv2018/azure-mgmt-storage/src/main/java/com/microsoft/azure/management/storage/implementation/StorageNetworkRulesHelper.java

It seems you can copy over the helper, stages and implementations from storage. But double check the logic work for key vault as well.

* @param networkAcls the networkAcls value to set
* @return the next stage of key vault definition
*/
Update withNetworkAcls(NetworkRuleSet networkAcls);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same feedback as above.

@tiffanyachen
Copy link
Author

Move to here #449

@anuchandy anuchandy closed this May 24, 2018
praries880 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

Comments