3 ms·
AWS in general are not fans of Anycast. Interesting thread from one of their principal engineers on the topic. https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/106726569368
by cavisne 7y ago
AWS in general are not fans of Anycast. Interesting thread from one of their principal engineers on the topic.
https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067265693681311744 https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067265693681311744
Google Cloud took a different approach based on their existing GFE infrastructure. It does not really seem to have worked out, there have been a couple of global outages due to bad changes to this single point of failure, and they introduced a cheaper networking tier that is more like AWS.
- ignoramous 7y ago> AWS in general are not fans of Anycast. I don't think that's true. Route53 has been using Anycast since its inception [0]. The Twitter thread you linked simply points out that fault isolation is tricky with Anycast, and so I am not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that you did. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/architecture/a-case-study-in-global-fault-isolation/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/architecture/a-case-study-in-gl...
- cavisne 7y agoRoute53 is the exception, compared to Google Cloud where the vast majority of api's are anycast through googleapis.com It's a good choice for DNS because DNS i a single point of failure anyway, see yesterdays multi hour Azure/Microsoft outage!
- ignoramous 7y agoGot it, thanks. Are there research papers or blog posts by Google that reveal how they resume transport layer connections when network layer routing changes underneath it (a problem inherent to Anycast)?