Gonzalo Parra

My feedback

  1. 39 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  2. 120 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Networking » Virtual Networks (VNET)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  3. 38 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    22 comments  ·  SQL Managed Instance  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Thanks for bringing this up. We currently don’t have plans for MSDTC support yet.
    Can you please let us know more about your scenario and how much effort it would take to re-write your application, how big of a blocker it is?

    Implementing MSDTC support in cloud environment is not a trivial ask. We need to make sure that there is a demand for this and it has higher priority than other features.

    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  4. 360 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    21 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We have raised the limit to 100 recently. We are regularly reviewing the limits and will continue to look for opportunities to raise the limits even further. If you have scenarios requiring limits higher than what is supported, please add your scenario details here (if you are comfortable with that) or raise an issue with Azure support and we will get back to you.

    Gonzalo Parra commented  · 

    We host 100's of sites and having such a low limit makes this service practically useless, the limit needs to be exponentially higher, in the 1000's for it to be really useful. Not sure if this would require a separate idea but allowing multiple host names (unlimited or very high limit) per listener would really help, wildcards solves the problem for some cases but not most.

    Also, if the problem is performance related, how come the limit is fixed and not size dependent? shouldn't the Large AG be able to handle a lot more than the Medium or Small?

  5. 718 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    29 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. 113 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  Storage » AzCopy  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  7. 2,950 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    122 comments  ·  Storage » Files  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hi folks,

    We have shipped a public preview of integration with AAD DS: https://azure.microsoft.com/blog/azure-active-directory-integration-for-smb-access-now-in-public-preview/

    What we have in preview is a first step along a much larger roadmap for integration with AAD/AD for authentication and authorization. As the blog post says, this initial preview is really about Windows cloud VM access to the Azure file share with an AAD identity. Future refreshes to this feature will add non-Windows (Linux, macOS, etc) support, and the ability to mount the Azure file shares on-premises with your AAD identity. You can learn more about this in our Ignite session as well (at around 22:00): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMzh2M66E9o

    We’ll keep you updated on our progress. In the meantime, don’t hesitate to continue posting feedback on this feature below.

    Thanks,

    Will Gries
    Program Manager, Azure Files

    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  8. 229 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    16 comments  ·  Storage » General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra commented  · 

    This is an important requirement so we can have control over the RTO, otherwise its a big question mark...

  9. 212 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    12 comments  ·  Site Recovery  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    under review  ·  ruturajd responded

    We are working to understand the requirements of this feature and deliver it. If you have any scenarios or examples that might help us take a decision kindly give a detailed comment below.

    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  10. 14 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  11. 152 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    unplanned  ·  13 comments  ·  Azure Resource Manager  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  12. 10 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  (General Feedback) » azure.microsoft.com  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra commented  · 

    This would be really useful.

    We have to publish our static IPs for our customers to be able to allow access on their firewalls. Right now its all over the place and they need to add a bunch of IP addresses to their rules. It would be great if we could just reserve (and pay for) a range of contiguous public IPs to be allocated as we need among our services / VMs and only a single range of IPs to our customers...

    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  13. 77 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  14. 898 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Gonzalo Parra commented  · 

    Agree with this, allowing zone transfers so Azure DNS can be used as secondary DNS service for split brain DNS configurations would be really useful.

    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  15. 97 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    8 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  16. 132 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    8 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gonzalo Parra supported this idea  · 
  17. 1,898 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    171 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hey folks, sorry for the late update. Some backend changes were made to alleviate this issue but I believe it doesn’t solve it for everyone yet. Let me go get some details and come back with a better update. Thanks!

    John

    Gonzalo Parra shared this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base