Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Suggestion to modify the expression in official document about Batch pool in VNet #124939

Open
JerryZhangMS opened this issue Nov 26, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@JerryZhangMS
Copy link

In official document https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/batch/batch-virtual-network#general-virtual-network-requirements, the third bullet point of "General virtual network requirements" part, it's saying:
If you aren't using Simplified Compute Node Communication, you need to resolve your Azure Storage endpoints by using any custom DNS servers that serve your virtual network. Specifically, URLs of the form .table.core.windows.net, .queue.core.windows.net, and .blob.core.windows.net should be resolvable.

But per my test result, when I create a Batch pool with Azure Virtual Network, but also with Batch managed public IP address, plus the Azure Virtual Network is configured to use Azure DNS as default option, in this case, even without any custom DNS server, the node in this Batch pool can work as expected.

The current expression in the document may make user think the private DNS server is a necessary thing (in fact it's not) when we create Batch pool with Virtual Network. Could you please consider to improve this expression?

@PesalaPavan
Copy link
Contributor

@JerryZhangMS
Thanks for your feedback! We will investigate and update as appropriate.

@ManoharLakkoju-MSFT
Copy link
Contributor

@JerryZhangMS
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
I've delegated this to content author @Padmalathas, who will review it and offer their insightful opinions.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants