[AKS] remove unsupported VM types

[mboersma]

Some SKUs don't have enough RAM to support Kubernetes workloads reliably, so we're removing support for those types. This change won't accomplish that validation, but will prevent SDK users from
being led astray and trying to provision those types.

cc: @weinong

PR information

• The title of the PR is clear and informative.
• There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
• Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
• If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
• Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

• I have read the contribution guidelines.
• My spec meets the review criteria:
  • The spec conforms to the Swagger 2.0 specification.
  • The spec follows the guidelines described in the Swagger checklist document.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2186

[azuresdkciprbot]

AutoRest linter results for SDK Related Validation Errors/Warnings

These errors are reported by the SDK team's validation tools, reachout to ADX Swagger Reviewers directly for any questions or concerns.

File: specification/containerservices/resource-manager/readme.md

⚠️0 new Warnings.(0 total)

❌0 new Errors.(0 total)

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

[azuresdkciprbot]

AutoRest linter results for ARM Related Validation Errors/Warnings

These errors are reported by the ARM team's validation tools, reachout to ARM RP API Review directly for any questions or concerns.

File: specification/containerservices/resource-manager/readme.md

⚠️0 new Warnings.(0 total)

❌0 new Errors.(0 total)

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

[azuresdkciprbot]

AutoRest linter results for SDK Related Validation Errors/Warnings

These errors are reported by the SDK team's validation tools, reachout to ADX Swagger Reviewers directly for any questions or concerns.

File: specification/containerservices/resource-manager/readme.md

⚠️0 new Warnings.(0 total)

❌0 new Errors.(0 total)

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

[azuresdkciprbot]

AutoRest linter results for ARM Related Validation Errors/Warnings

These errors are reported by the ARM team's validation tools, reachout to ARM RP API Review directly for any questions or concerns.

File: specification/containerservices/resource-manager/readme.md

⚠️0 new Warnings.(5 total)

❌0 new Errors.(4 total)

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

[lmazuel]

@mboersma a few question to understand:

• was it failing all the time if people were using this?
• does the server refuses them now? If no, what the server is doing? Still trying and there is a small chance it works?

[mboersma]

@lmazuel:

was it failing all the time if people were using this?

No, but roughly 50% of the time if a user provisioned an AKS cluster with the smaller VM types that I propose to remove here.

does the server refuses them now?

Not today, but soon. In the next week or two, users specifying these removed VM SKUs will get a specific error about "VM not large enough for AKS," which we think is better than letting someone try and fail about half the time.

This change isn't crucial since the validation will really be done server-side, but it should keep things consistent and documentation correct.

[lmazuel]

Ok, so you will change live the current ApiVersion. As long as the server will fail in a close future, I'm fine with the PR.
Out of curiosity, what happen to already successfully created AKS cluster with theses sizes?

[lmazuel]

LGTM since server will refuse them anyway

[mboersma]

what happen to already successfully created AKS cluster with theses sizes?

They can still scale and upgrade that cluster using its existing VM type. The server-side change will only reject these sizes when creating new clusters.

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2848

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#1815