We’re pleased to announce a public preview of our Key Vault references feature, which you can learn more about here: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/simplifying-security-for-serverless-and-web-apps-with-azure-functions-and-app-service/
There are some limitations to the initial preview, but we’re hoping to address those very soon. We’re looking forward to your feedback!
Matthew, Azure Functions team
Nothing planned short term but a great ask. This is an item that could potentially be contributed if interest to do so earlier. Hoping we get this planned soon.
Moving this work item to unplanned, as it is clear that this request is no for a global throughput limit.
We do now offer the ability to limit your maximum instances in the Premium plan, which will allow you to avoid swamping downstream resources. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-premium-plan#plan-and-sku-settings
We prioritized that above a max call per X limit, because our only control to limit throughput is to outright deny some number of requests above a threshold.
Keep the feedback coming!
Azure Functions Team
This is an awesome idea, and we’re exploring a few options to make it a reality.
However, the 600 connection limit per instance should be enough for most applications if you’re reusing or closing connections. If you truly need 600 open connections you are likely to run into the 10 minute timeout per execution.
Even after we add this you will still need to be mindful of your connection management.
Keep the votes coming!
Rest assured we still have this request in mind and are continually reviewing it. Please keep your feedback coming!
Hi all – we could really use more information on the use cases you would like us to deliver with this feature. To quote Darrel’s post below:
Are you looking for some kind of UI in the portal to enable developers to subscribe to webhooks exposed by APIs?
Or are you looking for the additional security provided API Management to limit what events a user can subscribe to?
Do you want to correlate the API Management subscription ID with registered webhooks?
Any information you can give about the scenarios you would like help with would be great.
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.
Program Manager, Azure Files
Our apologies for not updating this ask earlier. Renaming Blobs is on our backlog, but is unlikely to be released in the coming year. Today, you can use the “Copy Blob” API as a workaround.
Using the Azure Files service you can address Azure Storage like a network share using the SMB2.1 protocol. This enables usage of normal Windows API’s to rename files and directories. You can get started with the Files service by visiting https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/storage/storage-dotnet-how-to-use-files.
For any further questions, or to discuss your specific scenario, send us an email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
We understand this is a top customer ask and as such it is currently on our backlog to be prioritized. We will update when the status changes.
Due to various technical limitations, the first iteration of the customer-owned domains functionality will not be available for a few more months. We will provide an update as soon as we can get a more specific ETA.
Push to web is on our roadmap and we will update once we have a more concrete ETA.
We definitely recognize the popularity of this feature, and we discuss it constantly during the planning phases. However there are certain technical limitations in the system that add a large amount of development cost. Because of the cost and the fact that there is a workaround available, other features get prioritized over this one.
That being said, please keep voting for it. The popularity of the feature does help bring it up and makes us reconsider every time.
Apologies for the delay.
We’re doing some research both on the specifics of this ask as well as what it would take to support this.
Is the ask here to do the same thing that regular Azure AD does (see: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2014/12/18/azure-active-directory-now-with-group-claims-and-application-roles/) or is are there different requirements around this for Azure AD B2C?
Thanks for the feedback! We are working on enabling this feature.