Assigned
Status Update
Comments
mo...@google.com <mo...@google.com> #2
I have forwarded this request to the engineering team. We will update this issue with any progress updates and a resolution.
Best Regards,
Josh Moyer
Google Cloud Platform Support
Best Regards,
Josh Moyer
Google Cloud Platform Support
to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #3
This is not only useful for IP addresses, but also for many other resources. I understand that names are currently used as identifiers, so this request is probably not trivial to implement. Maybe distinguishing between a (numeric, automatically generated) identifier and a (textual) label is the way to go?
is...@google.com <is...@google.com>
ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #4
Is it any hope? We have migrated our IP address to the server with different role, and now the name of this IP address resource doesn't match its role at all. It seems to be trivial enough to momentary reserve static IP address of the old named resource, drop resource, and immediately recreate it with the new name and the old IP address.
na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #5
This would also improve life when using the Google Deployment Manager (since it otherwise error's out if you've changed a name of an IP)
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #6
Over 3 years to get something as basic as renaming a static IP address. Any progress here?
wi...@gmail.com <wi...@gmail.com> #7
Yes, I have a customer who has this exact issue too! Any updates or workarounds would be very appreciated!
Description
Issue #8 (IPv6 support) is probably much harder; I suggest protocol-41 support could be a good halfway house.
If native IPv6 support can be added, this would not be needed. (Although other people might want per-protocol control in the firewall for other reasons e.g. SCTP?)
I think it would be perfectly reasonable to have a simple yes/no rule for non-TCP/UDP protocols; I presume anyone turning them on would be able to apply any needed fine-grained control at the instance level.