Amazon Web Services Launches DNS Service 146
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
from the welcome-to-the-holiday-dolldrums dept.
from the welcome-to-the-holiday-dolldrums dept.
wiredmikey writes "Amazon Web Services (AWS) today announced a highly available and scalable Domain Name System service designed to give developers and businesses a reliable and cost effective way to route end users to Internet applications. The service, 'Route 53,' effectively connects user requests to infrastructure running in AWS — such as an Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud instance, an Amazon Elastic Load Balancer, or an Amazon Simple Storage Service bucket — and can also be used to route users to infrastructure outside of AWS."
We see what you did there Amazon. (Score:5, Insightful)
That is all.
Spamvertisement (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds great for WikiLeaks (Score:3, Insightful)
Since EasyDNS couldn't handle them anymore. Oh wait, wasn't there a problem with Amazon to start with?
Imma jump right on this... (Score:5, Insightful)
really? (Score:4, Insightful)
"A reliable, cloud-based DNS service has been one of the most requested offerings by our customers" ... really?
Hmmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
DO NOT WANT (Score:5, Insightful)
Tagged: DONOTWANT
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I know it's not normal to read the article on Slashdot, but seriously? Amazon is offering DNS hosting. Think BIND, not OpenDNS or whatever.
Re:We see what you did there Amazon. (Score:5, Insightful)
the question is, will it route to wikileaks when under government pressure? Oh right, it'll monetize every website you go to and block anyone the politicians don't like.
I'll pass on this, whenever.
I'm sure it will be useful... (Score:5, Insightful)
...until they censor your website. Wikileaks is not the only one [wordorigins.org] with a problem.
Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! (Score:4, Insightful)
Not sure why you'd single out Amazon for this. Wikileaks violated their ToS. Any provider will kick you off if you violate their ToS, Amazon just gets the flack because they actually had a high-profile customer that they dropped. It should be taken as a danger of relying on 'the cloud' (i.e. letting someone else control your important infrastructure), rather than specific evidence that Amazon is evil.
Remember boys and girls, putting stuff in the cloud means giving someone else control over the off switch.
Re:We see what you did there Amazon. (Score:5, Insightful)
It hasn't been "deemed illegal by the US government". That requires a court decision, and the government attorneys haven't even filed charges yet. People are innocent until proven guilty, facts are not established until proven in court. There most certainly are plenty of disputes about whether the publications were legal, on several different bases. But even if it were an "open and shut case", that still requires that the case be opened and then shut, which it hasn't.
Without that due process, Amazon can decide for any reason, like some Senator whining about some bad press, that content or services must be shut down. Due process is important, as is protection from arbitrary denials of services that are paid for and expected to critically support a business operation.
Re:We see what you did there Amazon. (Score:4, Insightful)
But it sure is a golden marketing moment. I'm an AWS customer (we do huge enterprise hosting environments that integrate with AWS) and I'd had been impressed with them had they said "10GBps of DDOS traffic? Pfffft. Our anycasted infrastructure easily shrugs that off." Now, they look bad in both technical and political circles (at least to those who believe in freedom of speech for those not accused or convicted of a crime).