4 ms·

As an AWS customer I want to escape IP entirely. It's a waste of time managing these complex networking systems with their archaic protocols (IP, BGP, DNS, etc)

As an AWS customer I want to escape IP entirely. It's a waste of time managing these complex networking systems with their archaic protocols (IP, BGP, DNS, etc) Just let me strongly associate identities with my workloads and apply policy indicating which workloads should be able to send data with which other workloads. How data gets from one workload to another should not even be my concern, just make it happen.

drpossum 3y ago
While your sentiment is valid, this is the type of argument people make on low code solutions. Which has never worked in reality and never will. There's just too much nuance and detail that needs to be considered when you have to do and optimize real workloads.
- Spivak 3y ago
  Of course but it pushes the abstraction forward to what we really want. It turns out that most applications don't actually want to mess with IP except as an implementation detail and optimization. Which is why most of the time you don't and you just get some application layer HTTP payload, RPC thing or WSGIish type call on the incoming side and let the ops people deal with the networking bits and it works well enough that people mostly don't complain. The request is that more outgoing services adopt this model where you had it off to your application server and it does the work and just gives you the data you want back. I don't think it's that crazy, it's just formally standardizing where we're already going.
pragma_x 3y ago
I agree completely. FWIW, this sentiment is why we're seeing a lot of cloud "platforms" crop up that do exactly what you're talking about. Rather than get mired in the component-zoo of virtualized datacenter (read: pretend) networking, just abstract all of it away.
flerchin 3y ago
IME "big picture folks" suddenly care about the details when their big picture fails to solve for the details.
hughw 3y ago
Like Heroku? (disclaimer, haven't used Heroku in years, no idea what the state of it is now).
paulddraper 3y ago
Uh, you want the Internet without Internet Protocol?
dilyevsky 3y ago
I think you’re thinking of mulesoft or maybe retool

drpossum 3y ago

While your sentiment is valid, this is the type of argument people make on low code solutions. Which has never worked in reality and never will. There's just too much nuance and detail that needs to be considered when you have to do and optimize real workloads.

Spivak 3y ago
Of course but it pushes the abstraction forward to what we really want. It turns out that most applications don't actually want to mess with IP except as an implementation detail and optimization. Which is why most of the time you don't and you just get some application layer HTTP payload, RPC thing or WSGIish type call on the incoming side and let the ops people deal with the networking bits and it works well enough that people mostly don't complain. The request is that more outgoing services adopt this model where you had it off to your application server and it does the work and just gives you the data you want back. I don't think it's that crazy, it's just formally standardizing where we're already going.

pragma_x 3y ago

I agree completely. FWIW, this sentiment is why we're seeing a lot of cloud "platforms" crop up that do exactly what you're talking about. Rather than get mired in the component-zoo of virtualized datacenter (read: pretend) networking, just abstract all of it away.

flerchin 3y ago

IME "big picture folks" suddenly care about the details when their big picture fails to solve for the details.

hughw 3y ago

Like Heroku? (disclaimer, haven't used Heroku in years, no idea what the state of it is now).

paulddraper 3y ago

Uh, you want the Internet without Internet Protocol?

dilyevsky 3y ago

I think you’re thinking of mulesoft or maybe retool