Forum Widgets
Optimal by Design: Architecting for Hybrid from Day One in AI and Application Development
For every new AI or application project you embark on, your initial architectural choices will determine the probability of long-term success of that effort, especially as it scales or needs to adapt to changing regulatory or business environments. This article discusses why architecting for hybrid up front puts you in the optimal position for anything that comes your way. https://blog.equinix.com/blog/2025/05/21/why-you-need-a-hybrid-first-strategy/ Do you agree? Is 'hybrid-first' truly the silver bullet for future-proofing, or are there scenarios where a pure cloud or colo/on-prem approach still makes sense? Share your perspective!
Equinix Internet Access - additional IPs
Hi team, When ordering Internet Access over fabric for a redundant connection type, how many sets of additional IPs are provided? For example is it just one set of additional IPs anywhere between /30 to /24? Or as it's a redundant pair do we get two sets of additional IPs e.g. additional IP range 1: anything from /30 to /24 additional IP range 2: anything from /30 to /24 Thanks
Inconsistent monetary information for Japan via Billing v2 API
Hi, we have a presence in different Equinix data centers and retrieve billing information via the Billing v2 API. We observed that the information we obtain for the Japan invoice (and that one only) has inconsistent (dare I say wrong?) tax amount values across time: For invoices from 2024-02 (oldest I have) until 2024-05 (which is not downloadable anymore due to the 12 month limit but I have a local copy) the Japanese line items behave exactly like all others we can observe, namely: non-zero taxAmount (10% of recurringAmount) and recurringAmount + taxAmount = totalAmount. For invoices from 2024-06 until 2024-08 (both in the snapshot I had from a few months ago and the one I just took now) the Japanese line items now still has a non-zero taxAmount (10% of recurringAmount) but totalAmount = recurringAmount. Checking a few entries we saw that the netAmount is the same as in previous entries which makes me assume that the totalAmount does not include any tax amount. For invoices from 2024-09 onward the Japanese line items now all have taxAmount = 0 and totalAmount = recurringAmount. This means that we are unable to obtain any tax information from the invoice other than assuming that the 10% applies to all line items. Furthermore, this data is inconsistent with the reality that there is tax to be paid. Could you explain why the data is so inconsistent, changing multiple times withing a few months? Could you also explain why the data for invoices since 2024-06 is inconsistent with the reality? Is there any resource where changes in the API are documented and where I could have learned about these changes? What can we expect moving forward? Should we expect the data to change again, hopefully to be correct again as it was pre 2024-06? Thanks JonasBilling v2 API deprecation?
Hello, today I noticed that on the API documentation overview page it says that the Billing_v2 API is Deprecated. I can't find any further information on that and also noticed that, in contrast to the WorkVists_v1 API which is marked in the same way, no deprecation information can be found on the actual documentation page. Would you be able to provide some more information on the deprecation or links to where I can find it? I'm especially interested in whether this API is actually going to be disabled in the future and if there's any alternative to obtain invoice information programmatically and machine-readable. Thanks, JonasUnderstanding Sustainable Energy in the Digital Age
Just read the latest Equinix blog post on powering a sustainable future! 🌱💡 Great insights into energy innovation for the digital era. Check it out here: https://blog.equinix.com/blog/2025/04/29/powering-a-sustainable-future-energy-innovation-for-the-digital-era/?country_selector=Global%20(EN)
Issues deploying Equinix Connections
I have managed to use several terraform modules without problem. I have used the palo alto cloudgenix vm modules, palo alto firewalls modules, device link modules, and fabric cloud router module. All work okay on the lastest version of equinix/equinix. However as I dive into other connections I get a lot version issues. For example. Leveraging the cloud-router-port connection. https://registry.terraform.io/modules/equinix/fabric/equinix/latest/examples/cloud-router-2-port-connection This would be used to connect the cloud router to the pa firewall mgmt interface. Documentation covers the following version. required_providers { equinix = { source = "equinix/equinix" version = ">= 2.9.0" } } } But code doesnt work without this version terraform { required_providers { equinix = { source = "equinix/equinix" version = "~> 1.26.0" } } } When using new versions error occurs. Failure. Ive redone this several times in my code base. ephemeral.aws_secretsmanager_secret_version.equinix_iac_credentials: Opening... ephemeral.aws_secretsmanager_secret_version.equinix_iac_credentials: Opening complete after 0s module.equinix_deployment.module.fw-mgmt-to-fcr-connection-ch-1a.equinix_fabric_connection.this: Creating... ╷ │ Error: 400 Bad Request Code: EQ-3142558, Message: Json syntax error, please check request body, Details: Unknown json property : aSide.accessPoint.router.package.code. Unexpected value '' │ │ with module.equinix_deployment.module.fw-mgmt-to-fcr-connection-ch-1a.equinix_fabric_connection.this, │ on ..\..\modules\cloud-router-2-port-connection\main.tf line 1, in resource "equinix_fabric_connection" "this": │ 1: resource "equinix_fabric_connection" "this" { I can get past this error and deploy the connection with an older version but then run into version issues when attempting to leverage the virtual-device-2-eia-connection https://registry.terraform.io/modules/equinix/fabric/equinix/latest/examples/virtual-device-2-eia-connection here the primary problem is that on older versions. there is no resource virtual-device-connection. only fabric-device-connection. One thought is to completely separate the fabric cloud router to port module Here is the original cloud router to port module main.tf resource "equinix_fabric_connection" "this" { name = var.connection_name type = var.connection_type bandwidth = var.bandwidth notifications { type = var.notifications_type emails = var.notifications_emails } a_side { access_point { type = "CLOUD_ROUTER" router { uuid = var.aside_fcr_uuid } } } z_side { access_point { type = var.zside_ap_type virtual_device { type = var.zside_vd_type uuid = var.zside_vd_uuid } interface { type = var.zside_interface_type id = var.zside_interface_id } location { metro_code = var.zside_location } } } order { purchase_order_number = var.purchase_order_number } } variables variable "connection_name" { type = string description = "Name of the Fabric connection" } variable "connection_type" { type = string description = "Type of the Fabric connection (e.g., IP_VC)" } variable "bandwidth" { type = number description = "Connection bandwidth in Mbps" } variable "notifications_type" { type = string default = "ALL" description = "Notification type" } variable "notifications_emails" { type = list(string) description = "Emails for notifications" } variable "purchase_order_number" { type = string default = "" } variable "aside_fcr_uuid" { type = string description = "UUID of the FCR device" } variable "zside_ap_type" { type = string default = "VD" } variable "zside_vd_type" { type = string default = "EDGE" } variable "zside_vd_uuid" { type = string } variable "zside_interface_type" { type = string default = "NETWORK" } variable "zside_interface_id" { type = number } variable "zside_location" { type = string } versions.tf terraform { required_providers { equinix = { source = "equinix/equinix" version = "~> 1.26.0" } } } module module "fw-mgmt-to-fcr-connection-ch-1a" { #FCR Router to FW Management Interface Connection source = "../../modules/cloud-router-2-port-connection" connection_name = "fcr-2-fw-mgmt-ch" connection_type = "IP_VC" bandwidth = 50 notifications_type = "ALL" notifications_emails = var.notifications purchase_order_number = "mgmt-connection" #aside Fabric Cloud Router aside_fcr_uuid = module.fcr_ch.id #zside Palo aAlto Firewall zside_ap_type = "VD" #Virtual Device zside_vd_type = "EDGE" zside_vd_uuid = module.pa_vm_ch.id zside_interface_type = "NETWORK" zside_interface_id = 1 # Palo Alto Firewall Management Port zside_location = "CH" #metro code }Terraform Module Equinix Internet Access. Does it exist?
I scavenged the terraform registry looking for a Equinix Internet Access Terraform module. ] I found an example of a connection to EIA.This is the only thing that comes up in the registry as EIA. https://github.com/equinix/terraform-equinix-fabric/tree/v0.22.0/examples/virtual-device-2-eia-connection But none that creates the EIA itself. Can anyone answer if this may or may not be supported in terraform and if so, what would the resource name be for it? The GUI terminology doesn't always translate one for one, so maybe I'm missing something.Tell a Story About Your First Data Center Migration.
They say you never forget your first data center migration - probably because it's like herding cats during a fire drill. I'm curious - what went sideways, what saved the day, and what would you never do again? Let's hear all the chaos, drama, or pizza-fueled heroics! 🍕🎖️
