nanog mailing list archives
Re: Gmail and SSL
From: Peter Kristolaitis <alter3d () alter3d ca>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 21:18:24 -0500
On 1/3/2013 9:08 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
I am not sure why this would be classified as a feature request. If it is impacting you, and you had service before, then is an Outage/Defect/Bug, full stop. Describing working service for a previously supported scenario as a "feature request" would be beyond ridiculous :)
Clouds in the sky tend to look pretty until the day they dump rain on you and then disappear. "Cloud apps" are kind of like that. ;)
Not to say that SaaS doesn't have its place in enterprise architecture, but one of the things that should have a huge, gigantic neon sign on it when you're doing your cost-risk-benefit analysis is that you're being put at the whim of your SaaS provider. If they make a change that breaks functionality that only a subset of their clients use, you'd better hope that one of those clients has enough financial clout with the provider to make that functionality come back, otherwise you've just painted yourself into a corner.
- Pete
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Current thread:
- Re: Gmail and SSL, (continued)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL George Herbert (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jeff Kell (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Damian Menscher (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Damian Menscher (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Michael Thomas (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Maxim Khitrov (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jimmy Hess (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Peter Kristolaitis (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jay Ashworth (Jan 04)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Matthias Leisi (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Steven Bellovin (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Kyle Creyts (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Christopher Morrow (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL William Herrin (Jan 02)