Gary

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Virtual Machines » Windows  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  2. 6 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Automation » PowerShell cmdlets  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary commented  · 

    To be more complete, ideally this will be part of the API so Terraform can add the update extension as part of the VM build and register it with the automation account. Powershell would be a stop gap solution for me.

    Gary shared this idea  · 
  3. 10 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 →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
  4. 5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Virtual Machines » Windows  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
  5. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  6. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Security and Compliance  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  7. 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.

    Gary commented  · 

    Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    It's good to be able to say that rather that just moaning :D

    Gary commented  · 

    How can this not be "Under Review"?
    The current limitation makes it virtually unusable.

  8. 391 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    32 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary commented  · 

    Still not fixed. Are you surprised when your bills don't get paid on time when you can't even send them to us?

    Gary supported this idea  · 
  9. 68 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    11 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
    Gary commented  · 

    I'd say it's the functionality of the extension install that should be changed.
    Installing the extension should set the LCM and assign the node configuration, but not wait for the configuration to complete.
    Splitting infrastructure set up from software set up makes more sense.
    Installing the extension provides the capability, but running the DSC configuration itself should be outside the scope of the install. After all, once the initial install is completed, it's likely that the DSC might change without doing a full redeploy of the environment, the DSC script might have a fault or possibly not even exist at initial deployment.
    Think I'll raise as separate feedback as well.

  10. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
  11. 87 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  8 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary commented  · 

    This needs to be per listener, not per App Gateway.

    Gary supported this idea  · 
  12. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Automation » Gallery  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  13. 4 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  14. 194 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  14 comments  ·  API Management » Pricing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
    Gary commented  · 

    By bundling all the features rather than throughput into the Premium tier you're completely pricing us out of this product.
    You have a whole "how-to" on combining App Gateway with APIM so you get the best of WAF combined with APIM and then discover it'll cost at least £2000 a month just for the APIM.

  15. 10 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  16. 18 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary commented  · 

    This needs to be per listener. If I have a server hosting multiple APIs, I might want to take down a single API for a release rather than the whole server in the backend pool.

    Gary supported this idea  · 
  17. 28 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Automation » Desired State Configuration  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary commented  · 

    This is not just a problem with NSGs.
    Any server behind a Standard Internal Load Balancer cannot communicate with Automation without assigning it an unneeded public IP address.

    Gary supported this idea  · 
  18. 232 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  Networking » Load Balancing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
  19. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Automation » Desired State Configuration  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary shared this idea  · 
  20. 1,049 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    36 comments  ·  Networking » Application Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Gary supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base