Support for customer_owned_ipv4_pool for Outpost ALBs

[davidschou]

Community Note

• 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 other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, 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

Description

This feature request is to add the ability to use customer_owned_ipv4_pool when creating an ALB in Outpost.

aws elbv2 create-load-balancer --name my-load-balancer --subnets <SUBNET> --scheme internal --customer-owned-ipv4-pool <COIP_POOL_ID>

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/reference/elbv2/create-load-balancer.html

New or Affected Resource(s)

• aws_lb

Potential Terraform Configuration

resource "aws_lb" "test" {
  name                         = "test-lb-tf"
  internal                     = true
  load_balancer_type           = "application"
  security_groups              = [aws_security_group.lb_sg.id]
  subnets                      = [aws_subnet.public.*.id]
  customer_owned_ipv4_pool     = <COIP_POOL_ID>
}

References

I couldn't find any issues relating to this. Apologies if my searching was lacking and there is.

[bflad]

Support for this functionality has been merged and will release with version 3.8.0 of the Terraform AWS Provider, next Thursday. Thanks to @johnbarney for the implementation. 👍

[ghost]

This has been released in version 3.8.0 of the Terraform AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template for triage. Thanks!

[ghost]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks!