Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture

[Matthew Kaufman <matthew () matthew at>]

Since your network has IPv6, I fail to see the issue.

Nobody is anywhere near being able to go single-stack on IPv6, so AWS is just another network your customers will 
continue to reach over v4. So what?

Heck, if v6 support from a cloud hosting company is so important, I see a great business opportunity in your future.

Matthew Kaufman

(Sent from my iPhone)

> On May 31, 2015, at 10:57 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
>
> Sigh…
>
> IPv6 has huge utility.
>
> AWS’ implementation of IPv6 is brain-dead and mostly useless for most applications.
>
> I think if you will review my track record over the last 5+ years, you will plainly see that I am fully aware of the 
> utility and need for IPv6.
>
> http://lmgtfy.com?q=owen+delong+ipv6 <http://lmgtfy.com/?q=owen+delong+ipv6>
>
> My network (AS1734) is fully dual-stacked, unlike AWS.
>
> If AWS is so convinced of the utility of IPv6, why do they continue to refuse to do a real implementation that 
> provides IPv6 capabilities to users of their current architecture.
>
> Currently, on AWS, the only IPv6 is via ELB for classic EC2 hosts. You cannot put a native IPv6 address on an AWS 
> virtual server at all (EC2 or VPC). Unless your application is satisfied by running an IPv4-only web server which has 
> an IPv6 VIP proxy in front of it with some extra headers added by the proxy to help you parse out the actual source 
> address of the connection, then your application cannot use IPv6 on AWS.
>
> As such, I stand by my statement that there is effectively no meaningful support for IPv6 in AWS, period.
>
> AWS may disagree and think that ELB for classic EC2 is somehow meaningful, but their lack of other support for any of 
> their modern architectures and the fact that they are in the process of phasing out classic EC2 makes me think that’s 
> a pretty hard case to make.
>
> Owen
>
> > On May 31, 2015, at 9:01 AM, Blair Trosper <blair.trosper () gmail com> wrote:
> >
> > Disagree, and so does AWS.  IPv6 has a huge utility:  being a universal, inter-region management network (a network 
> > that unites traffic between regions on public and private netblocks).   Plus, at least the CDN and ELBs should be 
> > dual-stack, since more and more ISPs are turning on IPv6.
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com <mailto:owen () delong com>> wrote:
> > I wasn’t being specific about VPC vs. Classic.
> >
> > The support for IPv6 in Classic is extremely limited and basically useless for 99+% of applications.
> >
> > I would argue that there is, therefore, effectively no meaningful support for IPv6 in AWS, period.
> >
> > What you describe below seems to me that it would only make the situation I described worse, not better in the VPC 
> > world.
> >
> > Owen
> >
> > > On May 31, 2015, at 4:23 AM, Andras Toth <diosbejgli () gmail com <mailto:diosbejgli () gmail com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Congratulations for missing the point Matt, when I sent my email
> > > (which by the way went for moderation) there wasn't a discussion about
> > > Classic vs VPC yet. The discussion was "no ipv6 in AWS" which is not
> > > true as I mentioned in my previous email. I did not state it works
> > > everywhere, but it does work.
> > >
> > > In fact as Owen mentioned the following, I assumed he is talking about
> > > Classic because this statement is only true there. In VPC you can
> > > define your own IP subnets and it can overlap with other customers, so
> > > basically everyone can have their own 10.0.0.0/24 <http://10.0.0.0/24> for example.
> > > "They are known to be running multiple copies of RFC-1918 in disparate
> > > localities already. In terms of scale, modulo the nightmare that must
> > > make of their management network and the fragility of what happens
> > > when company A in datacenter A wants to talk to company A in
> > > datacenter B and they both have the same 10-NET addresses"
> > >
> > > Andras
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org <mailto:mpalmer () hezmatt org>> wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 01:38:05AM +1000, Andras Toth wrote:
> > > > > Perhaps if that energy which was spent on raging, instead was spent on
> > > > > a Google search, then all those words would've been unnecessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Official documentation:
> > > > > http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ElasticLoadBalancing/latest/DeveloperGuide/elb-internet-facing-load-balancers.html#internet-facing-ip-addresses
> > > > >  
> > > > > <http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ElasticLoadBalancing/latest/DeveloperGuide/elb-internet-facing-load-balancers.html#internet-facing-ip-addresses>
> > > >
> > > > Congratulations, you've managed to find exactly the same info as Owen
> > > > already covered:
> > > >
> > > > "Load balancers in a VPC support IPv4 addresses only."
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > "Load balancers in EC2-Classic support both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses."
> > > >
> > > > - Matt