Cloudformation-coverage-roadmap: AWS::EC2::Route: support for DestinationPrefixListId

Created on 27 Jul 2020  路  7Comments  路  Source: aws-cloudformation/cloudformation-coverage-roadmap

Looks like the CLI and SDKs supports defining a route destination as a prefix list however this is not yet implemented in CloudFormation and I see no evidence that this is planned. Is it? I see that it is implemented in the SecurityGroup resource type as property DestinationPrefixListId.

My use case is that I'm using CFN to create routes across a large number of route tables back to a common set CIDRs, targeted to new transit gateways, via multiple stacks in multiple regions and accounts. These CIDRs will eventually change so customer-managed prefix lists would be a very useful feature here but not practical for me to use if I cannot do so from my CloudFormation template, as I can do for properties such as DestinationCidrBlock.

Most helpful comment

We have a similar scenario 鈽濓笍 for a project. Would really appreciate DestinationPrefixListId Cloudformation support for AWS::EC2::Route. We have over 400 route tables to be updated and this would extremely beneficial to our automation process.

All 7 comments

We have a similar scenario 鈽濓笍 for a project. Would really appreciate DestinationPrefixListId Cloudformation support for AWS::EC2::Route. We have over 400 route tables to be updated and this would extremely beneficial to our automation process.

this

This seems like an oversight. Please implement this either as a separate property (e.g DestinationPrefixListId) or as a context sensitive one under the existing DestinationCidrBlock, similar to how it works for Security Group entries, where CidrIp can handle PrefixListId, SecurityGroupId or CIDR ranges. Either way, this is a major inconsistency that needs to be addressed.

Concurred. Use Prefix lists to manage subnets are very beneficial but without the option to add it to the CFN route entry is a useless feature. I can manually add the Prefix lists manually the route entry to go around this issue, but it defeats the purpose in terms of the CFN automation.

bump

Anything being done about this yet?

I don't understand how something like this can take 1 year or more to be addressed.

I have a similar need to all those expressed here.

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

seansummers picture seansummers  路  3Comments

JohnPreston picture JohnPreston  路  3Comments

grauj-aws picture grauj-aws  路  3Comments

mildebrandt picture mildebrandt  路  3Comments

msaggar picture msaggar  路  3Comments