4 ms·
Are you saying that Amazon would divide up it's own IPv6 address space and provide a subnet for each customer? That's really the only way it would work for our
by rbranson 12y ago
Are you saying that Amazon would divide up it's own IPv6 address space and provide a subnet for each customer? That's really the only way it would work for our situation. I'm not sold that Amazon would actually have any motivation to go through the trouble to provide this as it would probably only impact 1% of their customers at best. The most rational path for them is to just assign addresses from a big pool and not bother with the all the fancy subnetting unless the customer asks for it (VPC).
- codeka 12y ago>The most rational path for them is to just assign addresses from a big pool and not bother with the all the fancy subnetting. That's what he's suggesting, though (I think). Except because it's IPv6, Amazon's big pool of addresses would never conflict with Facebook's big pool of addresses.
- agwa 12y agoExactly.
- rbranson 12y agoOne thing that may not have come across in the post is that one of the reasons we moved into VPC first is that Direct Connect is basically just a big dump pipe to AWS without VPC in place. Without VPC, there's no way to advertise routes for just your instances or to ensure that only traffic to/from your instances goes across the Direct Connect.
- giovannibajo1 12y agoYes, Amazon should allocate a static /64 to each customer, possibly even more on (free) request. That would also make for very easy firewalling rules where you can whitelist connections from your own instances with just one simple firewall rule.
- derefr 12y ago> Are you saying that Amazon would divide up it's own IPv6 address space and provide a subnet for each customer? That's what Linode does. Everyone gets a /64 to use as they please.
- vacri 12y agoAt AWS's scale, 1% of customers is quite a lot of people and quite a lot of money.