This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jen Linkova
furry13 at gmail.com
Fri May 6 11:27:08 CEST 2016
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Jens Link <jenslink at quux.de> wrote: > Benedikt Stockebrand <bs at stepladder-it.com> writes: > >> They used AWS/S3 for some relevant stuff, and since it was done >> externally it wasn't properly QAed. When Amazon switched IPv6 off >> again, they had a little bit of an issue. We only found out kind of >> accidentially, especially so because they didn't want to make it all >> that obvious that they are using Amazon. > > Can't be that relevant if it was not monitored properly. Your statement is true - but in the ideal world only... -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]