Should AZ be a required column?

[cnharris10]

Description

Describe the discussion topic and/or open topic is. Describe discussion that has taken place and where community feedback is needed. Provide specifics (specially if there are multiple possible options).

Proposed approach

Describe the approach that your group is proposing

Github issue or Reference

If the topic is related to a particular work item, reference the Github issue. If its a specification-wide topic, indicate that.

Context

Add any context that may help the community think through this and provide useful feedback

[flanakin]

If I remember correctly, AvailabilityZone is optional because not all providers support the concept and it doesn't impact cost.

If we make this required, are we making a statement that there should not be any optional columns? Should we define principles for when columns should or should not be optional/required?

[rupagcp]

Agree that we should have principles for which fields are "required" and why. Not all Cloud providers have other fields, yet they are marked as "required". I was just confused how we collectively decided on this one as not required when I saw all other fields required. How do we move forward in this discussion to make a decision? Thanks in advance

[udam-f2]

I think this is related to #296. The direction we go on that issue should help us decide if columns that (some|most) providers don't support can be made to column required: False

Commitment discounts aren't supported by many providers. Are those columns required?

It feels like we're narrowing in on a bare minimum set that's required (dates, provider, pricing quantity, list unit price, list cost, billed cost, currency and another set that based on having detailed billing data may be provided.

[flanakin]

Should we mark this as for 1.0 but dependent on #296?