In WPMWEB-I-90 you indicated you would not ship a feature that lets the WPM user which one of your nodes a check ran from. First of all can you reconsider that? It must not be too difficult to implement?
Secondly what I discovered is that when you setup a check it establishes a failover 'map' for that check based on the failover relationships that you have centrally defined at that moment in time. So in my case I created checks in Manchester (T1) and their failover location was London (T2) at the time of creation, so this is what they were given.
In-turn we as users often do several things such as whitelisting your IPs, excluding them from our analytics and keeping up-to-date if those IPs change. Knowing where checks run from is important which is why your KB is so handy.
However If you change your infra and add a new location closer to the primary, none of the existing checks update. What seems to happen is that when your team add a new location, they update their failover relationships in your central system. Now when you as an end user create a new set of checks months later, it now inherits a totally different failover map than your historic checks, and none of this is obvious to the user at all. In my case instead of failing over to T1+ London, my new checks failover to T2 Isle of Man... a location which I also don't have whitelisted and don't really want to run from.
None of this is obvious to the end user, partially because of WPMWEB-I-90 but also because end users cannot view *at all* the failover map assigned to a check. My thinking is that you could just expose this on the check settings screen. If a user enables failover then you insert the default failover location but of course then the user can change it!
This feature should apply to all check types.
Hi, we are going to promote this. The plan is to show the default failover when creating a check and also let the user choose any location as the failover. I can't give any estimation when this will be done however.
Regarding WPMWEB-I-90, it is still possible it will be implemented, but nothing is planned as of now.