RE: AWS Elastic IP architecture

["Tony Hain" <alh-ietf () tndh net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: christopher.morrow () gmail com
> [mailto:christopher.morrow () gmail com] On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 5:10 PM
> To: Tony Hain
> Cc: Hugo Slabbert; Matt Palmer; nanog list
> Subject: Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf () tndh net> wrote:
> > True, but it does represent a business decision to choose IPv6. The
> > relevant point here is that the "NEXT" facebook/twitter/snapchat/...
> > is likely being pushed by clueless investors into outsourcing their
> > infrastructure to AWS/Azure/Google-cloud.
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> www.snapchat.com.       3433    IN      CNAME   ghs.google.com.
> ghs.google.com.         21599   IN      CNAME   ghs.l.google.com.
> ghs.l.google.com.       299     IN      A       64.233.176.121
>
> snapchat seems to be doing just fine on 'google cloud services' though? oh:
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> www.snapchat.com.       3388    IN      CNAME   ghs.google.com.
> ghs.google.com.         21599   IN      CNAME   ghs.l.google.com.
> ghs.l.google.com.       299     IN      AAAA    2607:f8b0:4002:c06::79
>
> ha!

Try https://snapchat.com and see if you ever get an IPv6 connection... Yes an application aware proxy can hack some 
services into appearing to work, but they really fail the service customer because a site may appear to be up over IPv6 
until the user switches to https, then having to switch to IPv4 end up appearing dead because IPv4 routing is having a 
bad hair day.