[180392] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ca By)
Mon Jun 1 20:34:00 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <083301d09cc1$82342120$869c6360$@tndh.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 17:33:55 -0700
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Monday, June 1, 2015, Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net> wrote:
> Hugo Slabbert wrote:
> >>> snip
> >
> > On this given point, though: Facebook -ne generic hosting platform
>
> True, but it does represent a business decision to choose IPv6. The
> relevant
> point here is that the "NEXT" facebook/twitter/snapchat/... is likely being
> pushed by clueless investors into outsourcing their infrastructure to
> AWS/Azure/Google-cloud. This will prevent them from making the same
> business
> decision about system efficiency and long term growth that Facebook made
> due
> to decisions made by the cloud service operator.
>
>
This is the exact case for www.duckduckgo.com. They were ipv6, moved to
aws, and lost support , no aaaa today
To be honest, $dayjob may be next to lose ipv6 if / when www goes to the
cloud
> From my perspective, most of this conversation has centered on the needs of
> the service, and tried very hard to ignore the needs of the customer
> despite
> Owen and others repeatedly raising the point. While the needs of the
> service
> do impact the cost of delivery, a broken service is still broken.
> Personally
> I would consider "free" to be overpriced for a broken service, but maybe
> that is just me.
>
> In any case, if the VM interface doesn't present what looks like a native
> IPv6 service to the application developer, IPv6 usage will be curtailed and
> IPv4 growing pains will continue to get worse.
>
> Tony
>
>
