3 ms·
1) Mono-region is a feature not a bug. Regulatory requirements, citizenship requirements, the ability to not have a single global point of failure, etc. are al
by count 9y ago
1) Mono-region is a feature not a bug. Regulatory requirements, citizenship requirements, the ability to not have a single global point of failure, etc. are all huge benefits to the regional breakdown as it stands today. Nothing prevents you from deploying multi-region.
2) IAM is effectively global. Route53 is effectively global. AWS 'has the technology', they've just chosen a different engineering stance than Google, and are very up front about that.
- user5994461 9y ago1) Locality requirements should be fulfilled by attaching or limiting workloads to regions. Not by having the entire infrastructure and everything only ever exist in a single place (which breaks numerous legal requirements by the way). 2) ELB/ALB are not. S3 is not. AMI only exist in a single region. EBS cannot be moved, ever. Billing is not really. AWS is heavily region centric. For instance, it is impossible to list all instances attached to your account. In command line tools and the web UI, it asks you a region at startup, and you will only see instances in that region.
- count 9y ago1) They'd have to figure out how to constrain their service teams who support. It's not just customer locality that's important. 2) Yep, agreed there. Again, the choice that was made :)