Open matt-FFFFFF opened 9 months ago
How would this pattern recommendation be weighed against the comments from the vWAN team around the support for defining a vWAN with multiple resource groups?
Additionally, it looks like there are known issues with Azure Firewall Manager that would prohibit the use of multiple resource groups with a secured virtual hub.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/firewall-manager/overview#known-issues
The first article you posted says that it is supported to deploy into region aligned RGs.
Deploying a resource into a RG in a different region means the customer is at risk of outage in two locations instead on only one.
It is a very strong recommendation to deploy into region aligned RGs for this reason.
We will work with other teams on the other issue.
As per the pattern established in https://github.com/Azure/terraform-azurerm-avm-ptn-hubnetworking
Create resource groups for each hub location.
This better aligns with the guidance from the ARM team and will put customers in a better position in the event of a regional outage.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-manager/management/overview#resource-group-location-alignment