On 10/11/14 11:32, Michael Nelson wrote: > On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Andrew Wilkins > <andrew.wilk...@canonical.com> wrote: >> Hi Sameer, >> >> The behaviour changed a few months ago to address a bug: >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1353442 >> >> Is this causing you problems, or were you just surprised/curious? > > > Hi Andrew. This did cause a bug in the elasticsearch charm recently > [1] - I'd not realised it was related to a juju change, but thought it > was just a difference on ec2, that the private-address was not an IP > address (I had only tested with local, canonistack and HP). >
Note that for the EC2 case, using the DNS name for the unit's public address has been reported as a bug, since in the case of split horizon DNS, the DNS name resolves to a private IP address internally. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1308374 This bug is being fixed for the 1.21 Juju release, which we hope to get into beta within the next day or so. > The reason it caused an issue was because we were using the > private-address as part of a firewall rule which required an IP > address. We've pushed a fix now, but is there a way to foresee this > kind of change in the future? Maybe for these changes which might > affect charms, we could trigger retests for some set of approved > charms across HP, ec2 etc.? > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/charms/+source/elasticsearch/+bug/1386664 > -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
