Cybergavin

My feedback

  1. 85 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  Networking » Virtual Network  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cybergavin commented  · 

    I'm pondering the same. Microsoft's "best practice" architecture is not best for customers from a cost perspective. The hub-and-spoke architecture makes sense if VNet-peering (at least in the same region) were free. Otherwise, with each spoke being a different VNet (in a possibly different subscription), a lot of traffic can potentially flow across the hub-spoke VNet peering links. Then we may be forced to minimize the number of VNet spokes and use subnets/NSGs/NVAs within VNets to provide isolation between lifecycle environments or business units.

Feedback and Knowledge Base