Terraform-provider-azurerm: Support for adding rules/backends etc to an existing application gateway

[listentorick]

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

I have an application gateway which servers multiple SaaS customers. As I add new customers I need to add rules and backends. Currently Im using dynamic blocks, however this requires me to maintain and pass in a list of all tenants to the tf config which builds the AGW to ensure existing tenants arent lost.

New or Affected Resource(s)

It woud be great to be able to add a set of rules and backends when adding a tenant without the need to "know" about all of the existing tenants and their meta data.

• azurerm_application_gateway

Potential Terraform Configuration

resource "azurerm_application_gateway_rule" "myrule" {
name = "example-appgateway_rule"
application_gateway_name = azurerm_application_gateway.example.name
rule_type = "Basic"
http_listener_name = "listener_name"
backend_address_pool_name = "backend_address_pool_name"
backend_http_settings_name = "http_setting_name"
}

References

• #0000

[listentorick]

I am interested in contributing to this myself, before I do is this inline with your roadmap?

[RavulaChetan]

Whats the roadmap for support to add rules/backend to existing application gateway

[devblackops]

I'd like to extend this request to include other resource blocks. Notably, it would be great if there were discrete resources for:

• ssl_certificate
• probe
• backend_address_pool
• http_listener
• redirect_configuration
• request_routing_rule

I image this would look similar to how azurerm_lb has separate azurerm_lb_backend_address_pool, azurerm_lb_rule, and azurerm_lb_probe resources.

A more composable configuration would make provisioning the AppGW a lot easier when there are many modules that create resources to need to be exposed through it.