You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The org I work in has permission boundaries deployed which presribe a set of white-listed prefixes our Cloud Formation Stacks may use. At the moment, this means eksctl doesn't work out of the box for us, as it hard codes an 'eksctl-' prefix on to the Cloud Formation stack name, which then fails the PermissionsBoundary check.
Is there any appetite from other users for a customizable stack prefix? Or should I just fork and make this feature for us?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
Hi everyone,
The org I work in has permission boundaries deployed which presribe a set of white-listed prefixes our Cloud Formation Stacks may use. At the moment, this means eksctl doesn't work out of the box for us, as it hard codes an 'eksctl-' prefix on to the Cloud Formation stack name, which then fails the PermissionsBoundary check.
Is there any appetite from other users for a customizable stack prefix? Or should I just fork and make this feature for us?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions