Cap it with GitHub, make it count with Azure: governing GitHub Copilot spend
GitHub Copilot is now usage-based. Here is a working, one-command pattern to govern the spend: route Copilot BYOK through an Azure API Management gateway in front of Azure AI Foundry for real-time per-developer token quotas, per-developer metrics, and consumption on your own Azure meters.NCE in Azure Government
Can anyone give me a status on NCE for Azure Gov? We have a large number of older legacy subscriptions we'd like to get off of and onto Azure Plans and as I read it until NCE is available in Gov that isn't going to be an option unless we do a resource migration (which is expensive and an exercise the customer shouldn't have to go through to get access to the cost management tools). Thanks in advance!Right‑sizing Azure Savings Plans, one hour at a time
Most of us have, at some point, sized a commitment the same way we order food for a team offsite: estimate, round up, and hope nobody complains. It works for pizza. It is a less robust strategy for a three‑year Savings Plan. Azure Cost Management already produces commitment recommendations for you, and they are a great starting point. But the headline dollar figure on the portal hides the most useful signal a FinOps team can get its hands on: the hourly Pay‑As‑You‑Go (PAYG) usage that the recommendation engine actually looked at. Once you have that signal in a spreadsheet, "right‑sized" stops being a vibe and starts being a number you can defend in a steering meeting. This post walks through how to pull that data out of the Cost Management REST API, and shares a small companion PowerShell script that does the heavy lifting and produces analyst‑friendly CSV and Markdown outputs. Why a single recommended number isn't enough A Savings Plan recommendation is, at its core, an optimisation against a distribution of hourly compute spend over a lookback window. The portal typically surfaces the single commitment level that maximises savings under a "reasonable utilisation" assumption. That's a sensible default, but it answers only one question. The questions FinOps practitioners also want to answer include: What does my PAYG demand actually look like hour‑by‑hour? Smooth and predictable, or spiky and seasonal? How does coverage and savings change if I commit a bit less, or a bit more? Will the recommended commitment leave me with wastage on weekends or overnight? Can I correlate the hourly profile with maintenance windows, batch jobs, or business hours? You cannot answer those questions with a single dollar figure. You can answer all of them with the hourly series and the alternative commitment levels — and the API exposes both. What the Benefit Recommendations API gives you The endpoint is the Benefit Recommendations - List operation (api-version=2025-03-01). Pointed at any of the supported scopes — Billing Account (EA), Billing Profile (MCA), Subscription, or Resource Group — it returns one or more recommendations for the chosen lookBackPeriod (Last7Days, Last30Days, Last60Days) and term (P1Y, P3Y). The two $expand options are where the magic lives: $expand=properties/allRecommendationDetails returns an array of alternative commitment levels (AllSavingsBenefitDetails). Each entry includes commitmentAmount, coveragePercentage, benefitCost, overageCost, savingsAmount, savingsPercentage, wastageCost, and averageUtilizationPercentage. $expand=properties/usage returns the hourly PAYG charge series (usage.charges) that the engine used. Combined with properties.firstConsumptionDate and properties.lastConsumptionDate, you get a complete time‑aligned view of demand. Both expansions are cheap and worth requesting every time. They turn a single recommendation into a small, complete data product. Meet the script: Export-BenefitRecommendations.ps1 To make this useful in five minutes rather than an afternoon, there is a PowerShell script on GitHub that wraps the API call and produces ready‑to‑use artifacts. It is interactive, so there is nothing to memorise: === Azure Benefit Recommendations Export === Select billing scope kind: * [1] Billing Account (EA) [2] Billing Profile (MCA) [3] Subscription [4] Resource Group Enter choice 1-4 (default 1): 1 Billing Account ID: <your-EA-billing-account-id> Select lookback period: [1] Last7Days * [2] Last30Days [3] Last60Days Enter choice 1-3 (default 2): 3 Select term: * [1] P1Y [2] P3Y Enter choice 1-2 (default 1): 2 ... Retrieved 1 recommendation(s). It authenticates via the Az.Accounts module, always requests both $expand options, follows nextLink pagination, verifies API access up front (translating 401/403/404 into actionable hints), and writes four files using a predictable name pattern: yyyy-MM-dd-<scope>-<lookback>-<term>-AllRecommendationDetails.csv — one row per commitment alternative, ready for pivot tables. yyyy-MM-dd-<scope>-<lookback>-<term>-TopRecommendation.md — a Markdown brief on the top recommendation, including the recommended commitment row and the full alternatives table. yyyy-MM-dd-<scope>-<lookback>-<term>-HourlyUsage.csv — hour‑by‑hour PAYG usage for the top recommendation, aligned to the API's actual data window (no padding, no trailing blanks). yyyy-MM-dd-<scope>-<lookback>-<term>-Raw.json — optional full response dump, for archival or downstream tooling. The naming convention is intentional: paste a folder of these into Power BI and the dates, scopes, and terms are already in the filename. A worked example Here is a real shape from a sample Last60Days / P3Y export against an EA billing account. The AllRecommendationDetails CSV gives us four commitment alternatives: averageUtilizationPercentage,coveragePercentage,commitmentAmount,overageCost,benefitCost,savingsAmount,savingsPercentage,totalCost,wastageCost 100.000,28.868,4.124,30914.280,5889.072,6656.889,15.317,36803.352,0.000 100.000,39.168,5.848,26437.791,8350.944,8671.506,19.953,34788.735,0.000 9.984,97.883,16.359,919.948,23360.652,19179.641,44.131,24280.600,3.767 98.684,98.900,16.806,477.956,23998.968,18983.317,43.680,24476.924,315.907 Read those rows like an interactive lever: Commit $4.124/hr → 28.9% coverage, 15.3% savings, zero wastage. Safe, but most of your spend is still PAYG. Commit $5.848/hr → 39.2% coverage, 19.9% savings. Still safe, still conservative. Commit $16.359/hr → 97.9% coverage, 44.1% savings, ~$3.77 of wastage. This is the sweet spot the engine flags as recommended. Commit $16.806/hr → 98.9% coverage, 43.7% savings, but wastage jumps to $315.9 over the window. You bought more coverage and the engine charged you for it. The hourly CSV is what makes the recommendation defensible. It contains 1,428 rows — one per hour from 2026-04-11T00:00 through 2026-06-09T11:00 (the API's reported data range, not "now minus 60 days"): DateTime,HourlyPayGoUsage 2026-04-11T00:00,29.5350191832771 2026-04-11T01:00,29.566694701744 ... 2026-06-09T11:00,32.7312920192344 Drop that into Excel or Power BI, lay a horizontal line at the recommended commitmentAmount ($16.359/hr), and you immediately see how often demand sits above the line (covered by PAYG overage) versus below it (where the commitment is technically idle but, given the savings rate, still net‑positive). You can also slice by hour‑of‑day to spot weekend troughs or batch‑job spikes that change how you interpret "average utilisation." Try it yourself The script and full documentation live at github.com/DirkBrinkmann/azure-savingsplan-insights. Quickstart: git clone https://github.com/DirkBrinkmann/azure-savingsplan-insights.git cd azure-savingsplan-insights Install-Module Az.Accounts -Scope CurrentUser # if you don't already have it #Connect to Azure Connect-AzAccount #Run the script .\Export-BenefitRecommendations.ps1 You will need read permission on the scope you target — Cost Management Reader on a subscription, or Billing Reader at the billing account / billing profile level, is enough. Give it a spin against your own scope and tell us how it goes. The repo at github.com/DirkBrinkmann/azure-savingsplan-insights has Issues and Discussions enabled — bug reports, edge cases ("my response shape looks different"), feature ideas, and "I plotted this in Power BI and learned X" stories are all welcome. The script will only get better with real‑world data behind it, and yours is the kind we want to hear about. Closing nudge In FinOps terms, this is squarely an Inform phase activity: turning a black‑box recommendation into a transparent dataset your team can challenge, chart, and align on. The API has had this data all along; the script just makes it boring to extract — which is exactly what you want a FinOps tool to be. Pull a Last60Days / P3Y export for your top‑spending scope, plot the hourly line, and decide your next Savings Plan with a number you can point to. Your future self (and your finance partner) will thank you.Introducing GitHub Pre-Purchase Plans: A Simpler Way to Plan Your GitHub Spend
As AI-powered development scales, more of what organizations pay for on GitHub is shifting from fixed per-seat pricing to usage-based billing. GitHub Copilot, Actions, Codespaces, AI Credits: spend now reflects what teams actually build, and that can vary month to month. For most engineering and finance leaders, that raises a familiar question: how do you set a confident annual budget when consumption is variable? How do you capture the savings that come with committing upfront? That is what GitHub Pre-Purchase Plans are for. Commit to an amount upfront, use it across eligible GitHub services over a 12-month term, and receive built-in savings based on the size of the commitment. Variable usage becomes a plan. Builders keep building, and finance teams get a number they can count on. Microsoft is introducing two GitHub Pre-Purchase Plans (P3) for commercial customers, both available through Azure Reservations: How the plans work The model is the same for both plans: Commit upfront. Choose a pre-purchase tier that fits your expected GitHub usage. Receive built-in savings. Larger commitments unlock higher discount tiers, up to 15%. Draw down as you go. Eligible usage consumes from the prepaid balance over the 12-month term. Replenish or shift to pay-as-you-go. If usage exceeds the prepaid amount, purchase another plan or continue with pay-as-you-go billing where available. Commit units are available for the plan term and do not carry over after the term ends. Why choose a Pre-Purchase Plan? Pre-Purchase Plans are not replacing how you buy GitHub today. They provide another option for customers who have a reasonable view of expected usage and want to plan ahead. The value is straightforward: Simpler purchasing with one prepaid commitment instead of managing multiple separate charges across GitHub services. Built-in savings compared with pay-as-you-go pricing. The more you commit, the greater the discount. Alignment with Azure billing. GitHub usage is billed through the Azure subscription linked to your GitHub organization, so Pre-Purchase Plans fit into the same planning motions you already use for Azure commitments. Pricing*: Both plans use the same published tier structure: *Pricing as of June 2026 and is subject to change. Customers should review the latest documentation before purchasing. **Example if GitHub Enterprise generates a retail cost of $100, then 100 GitHub Commit Units (GCUs) are consumed Two examples Planning across the GitHub platform Suppose an organization expects about $500,000 in eligible GitHub usage over the next year across GitHub Copilot, GitHub Enterprise, GitHub Advanced Security, Actions, and GitHub AI Credits. With the GitHub Pre-Purchase Plan, the organization chooses the 500,000 commit unit tier, pays $425,000 upfront, and applies that commitment across eligible services over the 12-month term. That gives the team one platform-wide commitment with 15% built-in savings. Planning for AI credit consumption Another organization's biggest source of variability is GitHub AI Credits as Copilot and agentic development expand. Instead of using a broader platform commitment, that team chooses the GitHub AI Credits Pre-Purchase Plan so AI Credit usage draws down from a dedicated prepaid balance. This is a better fit when the main goal is to plan specifically around AI credit consumption. How Pre-Purchase Plans relate to Microsoft Agent Pre-Purchase Plan If you are also evaluating the Microsoft Agent Pre-Purchase Plan, here is the distinction: that plan is broader than GitHub and covers eligible usage across Microsoft Foundry, Copilot Studio, Fabric, and GitHub. Choose a GitHub Pre-Purchase Plan when GitHub is the platform you are planning around. Choose Microsoft Agent Pre-Purchase Plan when the goal is agent development spanning the wider Microsoft platform Getting started Both plans are available through Azure Reservations today. Sign in to the Azure portal Go to Reservations Select Add Choose GitHub Pre-Purchase Plan or GitHub AI Credits Pre-Purchase Plan. Select your subscription and scope. Choose your tier and complete payment For detailed purchasing steps, scope guidance, prerequisites, and examples, see the Microsoft Learn documentation: Watch how to bill their GitHub consumption (GitHub Copilot, Codespaces, Actions, etc.) through their Azure subscription GitHub Pre-Purchase Plan - Microsoft Cost Management | Microsoft Learn GitHub AI Credits Pre-Purchase Plan - Microsoft Cost Management | Microsoft LearnSentinel Foundry - MCP Server (Preview) (Github Community Release)
I’ve been cooking something that a lot of people in SOC have been struggling with — especially on the engineering side of Microsoft Sentinel. Thanks to the Microsoft Security team for shaping the capabilities of Sentinel even better with Sentinel Data Lake & Modern SecOps. Today’s the day I can finally share it. Note: This is not an official Microsoft product, but it is designed to make the Sentinel Build even better (complement) with much more intelligence. 🚀 Sentinel Foundry is now in public preview with 43 tools. (Sentinel Foundry - MCP Server) It’s an MCP server built to act like the brain of a strong Sentinel engineer — helping make building, improving, and operating Sentinel far more practical, faster, and honestly more enjoyable. For a lot of teams, the challenge is not understanding what Sentinel can do. The hard part is the engineering work around it: -> Deciding what data should actually be ingested -> Building a clean, scalable Sentinel foundation -> Writing useful detections instead of noisy ones -> Balancing security value with cost -> Turning ideas into deployable engineering outputs That is exactly why I built Sentinel Foundry to help communities grow stronger. It helps with the real engineering tasks behind Sentinel — from architecture thinking to detection design, deployment planning, ingestion strategy, automation ideas, and many of the workflows outlined in the GitHub project. How does it work? Here’s one of the flagship prompts I ran with it: “Give me a complete security posture report for our workspace. Score each pillar and tell me what to prioritise.” And within seconds, it produced a structured engineering blueprint that would normally take a lot longer to pull together manually. You can see the example prompts here in what it can do: https://github.com/prabhukiranveesam/Sentinel-Foundry#what-can-it-do I want building Sentinel to feel less like repetitive engineering overhead — and more like real security engineering that is fast, creative, and enjoyable. If you work with Sentinel as a SOC L2 analyst, engineer, detection engineer, consultant, or architect, I’d genuinely love for you to try it and tell me what you think. 🔗 Public Preview: https://github.com/prabhukiranveesam/Sentinel-Foundry This is just the start of an AI era — and I’m excited to keep shaping it with more powerful features over the coming days. This is very easy to set up and will be available to all of you at no cost during this month as part of the public preview, and your feedback is extremely valuable to shape this as a powerful solution.
How to control your Azure costs with Governance and Azure Policy
Azure resources can be configured in many ways, including ways which affect their performance, security, reliability, available features and ultimately cost. The challenge is, all these resources and configurations are completely available to us by default. As long as someone has permission, they can create any resource and configuration they like. This implicit “anything goes” gives our technical teams the freedom to decide what’s best. Like a kid in a toy shop, they will naturally favour the biggest, fastest and coolest toys. The immediate risk of course, is building beyond business requirements. Too much SKU, too much resilience, too much performance and too high cost. Left unchecked, and we risk increasingly challenging and long-term issues: Over-delivering will quickly become the norm. Excessive resources configurations will become the habitual default in all environments. Teams will become mis-aligned from wider business requirements. Teams will become used to working in a frictionless environment, and challenge any restrictions. FinOps teams will be stuck in endless cost optimisation work. You may already be feeling the pain. Trapped in a cycle of repetitive, reactive cost optimisation work, seeing the same repeat offenders and looking for a way out. To break (or prevent) the cycle, a new approach is needed. We must switch priorities from detection and removal, to prevention and control. We must keep waste out. We must avoid over-provisioning. We can achieve this with governance. What is governance Governance is a collection of rules, processes and tools that control how an organization consumes IT resources. It ensures our teams deploy resources that align to certain business goals, like security, cost, resource management and compliance. Governance rules are like rules for a boardgame. They define how the game should be played, no matter who is playing the game. This is important. It aligns everyone to our organization's rules regardless of role, position, seniority and authority. It helps ensures people play by the rules rather than their rules. Try playing Monopoly with no rules. What’s going to happen? I will pass go, and I will collect 200 dollars. For Microsoft Azure, and the cloud in general, governance is centered around controlling how resources can and cannot be configured. Storage Accounts should be configured like this. Virtual Machines must be configured like that. Disks can’t be configured with this. It's as much about keeping wrong configurations out, as the right configurations in. When we enforce configurations that meet our goals and restrict those that don’t, we drastically increase our chance of success. Why governance matters for FinOps Almost all over-provisioning and waste can be traced back to how a resource is configured. From SKU, to size, redundancy and additional features, if it’s not needed it’s being wasted. That’s all over-provisioning and waste is; Resources, properties and values that we don’t need. Too much SKU, like Premium Disks Standard HDD/SSD. Too much redundancy, like Storage Accounts with GRS when LRS is fine. Too many features, like App Gateways with WAF but it’s disabled. Have a think for a moment. What over-provisioning have you seen in the past? Was it one or two resource properties causing the problems? Whatever you’ve seen, with governance we can stop it happening again. When we control how resources get configured, we can control over-provisioning and waste, too. We can determine configurations we don’t need through our optimization efforts, and then create rules that define the configurations we do need: “We don’t need Premium SSD disks.” becomes “Disks must be Standard HDD/SSD.” “We don’t need Storage Accounts with GRS.” becomes “Storage Accounts must use LRS.” “We don’t need WAF enabled Application Gateways” becomes “Application Gateways should be Standard SKUs” These rules effectively remove the option to build beyond requirements. They will help teams avoid building too much/too big, stay within their means, hold them a bit more accountable and protect us from future overspend. Detection becomes Prevention. Removal becomes Control. Over time, we will: Help our teams deliver just enough. Raise and improve awareness of over-configurations and waste. Help keep waste out once it’s found. Reduce the chances over-provisioning in future. Steadily reduce the need for ongoing Cost Optimisation efforts. Free up time for other FinOps stuff. This is why governance is a natural evolution from cost optimization, and why it’s critical for FinOps teams who want to be more proactive and spend less time cleaning up after tech teams. How can we natively govern Microsoft Azure? In Microsoft Azure, we can use the native governance service Azure Policy to help control our environments. We can embed our governance rules into Azure itself and have Azure Policy do the heavy lifting of checking, reporting and enforcing. Azure Policy has many useful features: Supports over 74000 resource properties, including all that generate costs. Can audit resources, deny deployments and even auto-resolve resources as they come into Azure. Provides easy reporting of compliance issues, saving time on manual checks. Checks every deployment from every source. From Portal to Terraform, it’s got you covered. Supports different scopes from Resource Groups to Management Groups, allowing policies to be used at any scale. Supports parameters, making policies re-usable and quick to modify when responding to change in requirements. Exemptions can be used on resources we want to ignore for now. Supports different enforcement modes, for safe rollout of new policies. It comes at no additional cost. Free! These features make Azure Policy an extremely flexible and powerful tool that can help control resources, properties and values at any scale. We can: Create Policies for almost any cost-impacting value. SKUs, Redundancy Tiers, Instance Sizes, you name it… Use different effects based on how ‘strict’ the rule should be. For example, we can use Deny (resource creation) for resource missing “Must have” attributes, and Audit to check if resources are still compliant with “Should have” attributes. Use a combination of effects, enforcement modes and exemptions to control the rollout of new policies. Reuse the Policies on multiple environments (like development versus production), with different values and effects depending on the environment's needs. Quickly change the values when needed. When requirements change, the parameters can be modified with little effort. How to avoid unwanted Friction A common concern with governance is that it will create friction, interrupt work and slow teams down. This is a valid concern, and Azure Policy’s features allow for a controlled and safe rollout. With a good plan there is no need to worry. Consider the following: Start with Audit-Only policies and non-production environments. Start with simpler resources and regular/top offenders. Test policies in sandboxes before using them in live environments. Use the ‘Do not Enforce’ mode when first assigning Deny policies. This treats them as Audit-only, allowing review before being enforced. Always parameterize Effects and Values, for quick modification when needed. Use exemptions when there are sensitive resources that are best to ignore for now. Work with your teams and agree to a fair and balanced approach. Governance is for everyone and should include everyone where possible. The biggest challenge of all may be breaking habits formed over years of freedom in the Cloud. It’s natural to resist change, especially when it takes away our freedom. Remember, it’s friction where it’s needed, Interuption where it’s needed, slow down where it’s needed. They key to getting teams onboard is delivering the right message. Why are we doing this? How will they benefit? How does it help them? How could they be impacted if you do nothing? This needs to be more than “To meet our FinOps goals”. That’s your goal, not theirs. They won’t care. Try something like: We keep seeing over-utilization and waste and are spending an additional ‘X amount’ of time and money trying to remove it. This is now impacting our ability invest properly into our IT teams, affecting other departments and impacting our overall growth. If we can get over-spend reduced and under control, we can re-invest where you need it; tooling, people, training and anything else that makes your lives better. We want to implement governance rules and policies that will prevent issues reoccurring. With your insights and support we can achieve this faster, avoid unwanted impact, and can re-invest back into our IT teams once done. Sound good to you?! This is far more compelling and gives them reason to get onboard and help out. How to start your FinOps governance journey Making the jump from workload optimization into governance might initially sound challenging, but it’s actually pretty straightforward. Consider the typical workload optimization cycle: Discover potential misconfiguration, optimization and waste cleanup opportunities. Compare to actual business requirements. Optimize workload to meet those business requirements. A governance practice extends this to the following: Identify potential misconfigurations, optimization and waste cleanup opportunities. Compare to actual business requirements. Optimize workload to meet those business requirements. Create an Azure Policy based on how the resource should have originally been configured, and how it should remain in future. Thats it, one extra step. Most of the hard work has already happened in steps 1-3, in the workload optimization we’ve already been doing. Step 4 simply turns the optimization into rule that says “This resource must be like this from now on”, preventing it happening again. Let's do it again with a real resource, an Azure Disk: Identify Premium SSD Disks in non-production environment. Compare to business requirements, which confirms Standard HDD is fine. Change Disk SKU from Premium to Standard HDD. Create Azure Policy that only allows Disks with Standard HDD in the environment and denies other SKUs. Done. No more Premium SSDs in this environment again. Prevention and Control. The real work lies in being able to understand and identify how resources become over-provisioned and wasteful. Until then we will struggle to optimize, let alone govern. The Wasteful Eight There's so many resources and properties available. Understanding all the ways they can create waste can be challenging. Fortunately, we can group resource properties into eight main categories, which make our efforts a bit easier. Lets look at the Wasteful Eight: Category Examples Over-provisioned SKUs - Disks with Premium SSD instead of Standard HDD/SSD. - App Service Plans with Premium SKU, instead of Standard. - Azure Bastion with Premium SKU, instead of Developer. Too much redundancy - Storage Accounts configured with GRS, when LRS is fine. - Recovery Services Vaults with GRS, when LRS is fine. - SQL Databases with Zone Redundancy enabled. Too large / too many instances. - Azure VMs with too many CPUs. - SQL Databases with too many vCores/DTUs. - Disks which are over 1024GB. Supports auto-scaling/serverless, but aren’t using it. - Application Gateway doesn’t have auto-scaling enabled. - App Service Plans without Auto-Scaling. - SQL Databases using fixed provisioning, instead of Serverless or Elastic Pools Too many backups. - Backups that are too frequent. - Backups with too long retention periods. - Non-prod backups with similar retentions as Prod. Too much logging. - Logging enabled in non-prod. - Log retentions too long. - Logging to Log Analytics instead of Storage Accounts. - Log Analytics not using cheaper table plans. Extra features that are disabled, or not being used. - Application Gateway with WAF SKU, but the WAF is disabled. - Azure Firewall with Premium SKU, but IDPS is disabled. - Storage Accounts with SFTP enabled but not used. Orphaned/Unused. - Unattached Disks - Empty App Service Plans - Unattached NAT Gateways Remember, it's only wasteful if you don't have a business need for it, like too much redundancy in a non-production/development environment. In a production environment, you're likely to need premium disks or SKUs, GRS, and longer logging and backup retention periods. Governance is about reducing spend where you don't need it, and frees up money to spend where you do need it, for better redundancy, faster response times etc. All resources will fall somewhere in the above categories. A single resource can be found in most of them. For example, an Application Gateway can: Have an over-provisioned/unused SKU (WAF vs Standard). Have auto-scaling disabled. Have too many instances. Have excessive logging enabled. Have the WAF SKU, but the WAF is for some reason disabled. Be orphaned, by having no backend VMs. Breaking down any resource like this will uncover most of its cost-impacting properties and give us a good idea of what to focus on. A few outliers are inevitable, but the vast majority will be covered. Let's explore the Application Gateway examples further, the reasons why each item is wasteful and the subsequent Policies we might consider in a non-production environment. I’ve also included some links to respective Azure Policy definitions available in GitHub (test before use!). Discovery Reason Governance Rule/Policy Allowed Values and effects if applicable Application Gateway has WAF SKU but doesn’t need it. We use another firewall product. Allowed Application Gateway SKUs Standard Deny Application Gateway isn’t configured with Auto-Scaling, creating inefficient use of instances. Auto-Scaling improves efficiency by scaling up and down as demand changes. Manual scaling is inefficient. Application Gateway should be configured with Auto-Scaling. Deny Application Gateway min/max instance counts are higher than needed. Setting Min/Max instance thresholds avoids them being too high. Particularly the min count, which might not need more than 1 instance. Allowed App Gateway Min/Max instance counts Min Count: 1 Max Count: 2 Deny Non-Prod Application Gateways have logging enabled, when it’s not needed. We don't have usage that needs to be logged in non-production environments. Non-Prod Application Gateways should avoid logging Deny Application Gateway has WAF but it’s disabled. A disabled WAF is doing nothing yet still paid for. Either use it, or change the Tier to Standard to reduce costs. Application Gateway WAF is disabled. Audit Application Gateway has no Backend Pool resources. Indicates an orphaned/unused App Gateway. It should be removed. Application Gateway has empty Backend Pool and appears Orphaned Audit Now this might seem a bit over the top. Do we really to be controlling our App Gateway min/max scaling counts? It depends. If you have a genuine problem with too many instances then yes, you probably should. The point is, you can if you need to. This simply demonstrates how powerful governance and Azure Policy can be at controlling how resources are used. A more likely starting point will be things like SKUs, Sizes, Redundancy Tiers and Logging. These are the high risk, high impact areas you’ve probably seen before and want to avoid again. Once you exhaust those it's time to jump into Cost Management and explore your most expensive resources and services. Explore the Billing Meters to see how each resources costs are broken down. This is where your money is going and where your governance rules will have the biggest impact. Where to find Azure Policies If you want to use Azure policy you're going to need some Policy Definitions. A Definition is your governance rule defined in Azure. It tells Azure what configurations you do and don't want, and how to deal with problems. It's recommended that you start with some of the in-built policies first, before creating your own. These are provided by Microsoft, available inside Azure Policy to be applied, and are maintained by Microsoft. Fortunately, there are plenty of policies to choose from: built-in, community provided, Azure Landing Zone related and a few of my own: Azure Built-in Policy Repo: https://github.com/Azure/azure-policy Azure Community Policy Repo: https://github.com/Azure/Community-Policy Azure Landing Zones Policies: https://github.com/Azure/Enterprise-Scale/blob/main/docs/wiki/ALZ-Policies.md My stuff: https://github.com/aluckwell/Azure-Cost-Governance Making the search even easier is the AzAdvertizer. This handy tool brings thousands of policies into a single location, with easy search and filter functionality to help find useful ones. It even includes 'Deploy to Azure' links for quick deployment. AzAdvertizer: https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer_all.html Of the thousands of policies in AzAdvertizer, the list below is a great starting point for FinOps. These are all built-in, ready to go and will help you get familiar with how Azure Policy works: Policy Name Use Case Link Not Allowed Resource Types Block the creation of resources you don't need. Helps control when resource types can/can't be used. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/6c112d4e-5bc7-47ae-a041-ea2d9dccd749.html Allowed virtual machine size SKUs Allow the use of specific VM SKUs and Sizes and block SKUs that are too big or not fit for our use-case. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/cccc23c7-8427-4f53-ad12-b6a63eb452b3.html Allowed App Services Plan SKUs Allow the use of specific App Service Plan SKUs. Block SKUs that are too big or not fit for our use-case. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/27e36ba1-7f72-4a8e-b981-ef06d5c78c1a.html [Preview]: Do not allow creation of Recovery Services vaults of chosen storage redundancy. Avoid Recovery Services Vaults with too much redundancy. If you don't need GRS, block it. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/8f09fda1-91a2-4e14-96a2-67c6281158f7.html Storage accounts should be limited by allowed SKUs Avoid too much redundancy and performance when it's not needed. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/7433c107-6db4-4ad1-b57a-a76dce0154a1.html Configure Azure Defender for Servers to be disabled for resources (resource level) with the selected tag Disable Defender for Servers on Virtual Machines if they don't need it. Help control the rollout of Defender for Servers, avoiding machines that don't need it. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/080fedce-9d4a-4d07-abf0-9f036afbc9c8.html Unused App Service plans driving cost should be avoided Highlight when App Service Plans are 'Orphaned'. Either put them to use or get them deleted ASAP. https://www.azadvertizer.net/azpolicyadvertizer/Audit-ServerFarms-UnusedResourcesCostOptimization.html New policies are always being added, and existing policies improved (see the Versioning). Check back occasionally for changes and new additions that might be useful. When you get the itch to create your own, I'd suggest watching the following videos to understand the nuts and bolts of Azure Policy, and then onto Microsoft Learn for further reading. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wGns611G4w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIn_kHz4hk https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/governance/policy/overview Good luck!Understanding the Total Cost of Ownership
Whether you're just beginning your journey in Azure or are already managing workloads in the cloud, it's essential to ground your strategy in proven guidance. The Microsoft Cloud Adoption Framework for Azure offers a comprehensive set of best practices, documentation, and tools to help you align your cloud adoption efforts with business goals. One of the foundational steps in this journey is understanding the financial implications of cloud migration. When evaluating the migration of workloads to Azure, calculating the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is a crucial step. TCO is a comprehensive metric that includes all cost components over the life of the resource. A well-constructed TCO analysis can provide valuable insights that aid in decision-making and drive financial efficiencies. By understanding the comprehensive costs associated with moving to Azure, you can make informed choices that align with your business goals and budget. Here is a breakdown of the main elements that you need to build your own TCO: 1. Current infrastructure configuration: Servers: details about your existing servers, including the number of servers, their specifications (CPU, memory, storage), and operating systems. Databases: information about your current databases, such as the type, size, and any associated licensing costs. Storage: type and amount of storage you are currently using, including any redundancy or backup solutions. Network Traffic: Account for outbound network traffic and any associated costs. 2. Azure Environment Configuration: Virtual Machines (VMs): appropriate Azure VMs that match your current server specifications. This has to be based on CPU, memory, storage, and region. Storage Options: type of storage (e.g., Standard HDD, Premium SSD), access tiers, and redundancy options that align with your needs. Networking: networking components, including virtual networks, load balancers, and bandwidth requirements. 3. Operational Costs: Power and Cooling: Estimate the costs associated with power and cooling for your on-premises infrastructure. IT Labor: Include the costs of IT labor required to manage and maintain your current infrastructure. Software Licensing: Account for any software licensing costs that will be incurred in both the current and Azure environments. Once you have more clarity of these inputs you can complement your analysis with other tools depending on your needs. The Azure Pricing Calculator is well suited to providing granular cost estimation for different Azure services and products. However, if the intent is to estimate cost and savings during migrations, Azure Migrate business case feature should be the preferred approach as it will allow the user to perform detailed financial analysis (TCO/ROI) for the best path forward and assess readiness to move workloads to Azure with confidence. Understand your Azure costs The Azure pricing calculator is a free cost management tool that allows users to understand and estimate costs of Azure Services and products. It serves as the only unauthenticated experience that allows you to configure and budget the expected cost of deploying solutions in Azure The Azure pricing calculator is key for properly adopting Azure. Whether you are in a discovery phase and trying to figure out what to use, what offers to apply or in a post purchase phase where you are trying to optimize your environment and see your negotiated prices, the azure pricing calculator fulfills both new users and existing customers' needs. The Azure pricing calculator allows organizations to plan and forecast cloud expenses, evaluate different configurations and pricing models, and make informed decisions about service selection and deployment options. Decide, plan, and execute your migration to Azure Azure Migrateis Microsoft’s free platform for migrating to and modernizing in Azure. It provides capabilities for discovery, business case (TCO/ROI), assessments, planning and migration in a workload agnostic manner. Customers must have an Azure account and create a migration project within the Azure portal to get started. Azure Migrate supports various migration scenarios, including for VMware and Hyper-V virtual machines (VM), physical servers, databases, and web apps. The service offers accurate appliance based and manual discovery options, to cater to customer needs. The Azure Migrate process consists of three main phases: Decide, Plan, and Execute. In the Decide phase, organizations discover their IT estate through several supported methods and can get a dependency map for their applications to help collocate all resources belonging to an application. Using the data discovered, one can also estimate costs and savings through the business case (TCO/ROI) feature. In the Plan phase, customers can assess for readiness to migrate, get right-sized recommendations for targets in Azure and tools to use for their migration strategy (IaaS/PaaS). Users can also create a migration plan consisting of iterative “waves” where each wave has all dependent workloads for applications to be moved during a maintenance window. Finally, the Execute phase focuses on the actual migration of workloads to a test environment in Azure in a phased manner to ensure a non-disruptive and efficient transition to Azure. A crucial step in the Azure Migrate process is building a business case prior to the move, which helps organizations understand the value Azure can bring to their business. The business case capability highlights the total cost of ownership (TCO) with discounts and compares cost and savings between on-premises and Azure including end-of-support (EOS) Windows OS and SQL versions. It provides year-on-year cash flow analysis with resource utilization insights and identifies quick wins for migration and modernization with an emphasis on long-term cost savings by transitioning from a capital expenditure model to an operating expenditure model, paying only for what is used. Understanding the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is essential for making informed decisions when migrating workloads to Azure. By thoroughly evaluating all cost components, including infrastructure, operational, facilities, licensing and migration costs, organizations can optimize their cloud strategy and achieve financial efficiencies. Utilize tools like the Azure Pricing Calculator and Azure Migrate to gain comprehensive insights and ensure a smooth transition to the cloud.Optimize your Azure costs with our expert guidance, pricing tools, and resources
Efficient management of cloud resources is pivotal for controlling costs and building resilient infrastructure. Taking a strategic approach not only maximizes return on investment but also positions your organization to innovate and manage risk. Recognizing the needs of our customers to bolster their cloud management practices, Microsoft recently launched Azure Essentials as an all-in-one showcase for prescriptive guidance, expert training, and AI-assisted solutions.Moving to a Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) from an Enterprise Agreement (EA)
Microsoft has introduced a new contractual model for Azure enterprise customers, called the Microsoft Customer Agreement. Guidance on changes to the billing hierarchy can be found here: Set up billing for Microsoft Customer Agreement - Azure Microsoft Senior Cloud Solution Architect Dina Fatkulbayanova has written a great article on LinkedIn sharing her knowledge and recommendations of the transition process and billing hierarchy changes: Moving from EA to MCA: what you should know Check it out and please share with your networks on LinkedIn!
