Skip to content

Conversation

@excavator-matt
Copy link

Description

The previous documentation was vague with regards to enable_nat_gateway vs single_nat_gateway. These two statements could not be true at the same time, yet the two variables can both be true.

"Should be true if you want to provision NAT Gateways for each of your private networks"

"Should be true if you want to provision a single shared NAT Gateway across all of your private networks."

Motivation and Context

I was confused about this and I have seen other people be confused about this.

Breaking Changes

N/A

How Has This Been Tested?

  • I have updated at least one of the examples/* to demonstrate and validate my change(s)
  • I have tested and validated these changes using one or more of the provided examples/* projects
  • I have executed pre-commit run -a on my pull request

N/A

@excavator-matt excavator-matt changed the title Clarify enable_nat_gateway vs single_nat_gateway docs: Clarify enable_nat_gateway vs single_nat_gateway Aug 28, 2025
@excavator-matt
Copy link
Author

excavator-matt commented Aug 28, 2025

I am not sure who reviews, but it seems you have been reviewing some recent PRs @bryantbiggs. What do think? I can show you some public examples on where other people have been confused about this as well.

@bryantbiggs
Copy link
Member

I don't think I've seen anyone confused by this

@bryantbiggs
Copy link
Member

@github-actions
Copy link

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 23, 2025
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants