Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Web Services Launches DNS Service

Posted by CmdrTaco on 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."

146 comments

  1. We see what you did there Amazon. by anom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That is all.

    1. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by poetmatt · · 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.

    2. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Chapter80 · · Score: 1

      Route 53 - sort of a combination of the famous Route 66 and a 'leet version of S3. ...in case you didn't get it.

    3. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by should_be_linear · · Score: 4, Funny

      New patented feature for governments: "One click assassination of DNS registrar".

      --
      839*929
    4. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by nicholas22 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly, they showed their true colors in the way that they handled the WikiLeaks affair / pressure from the government. Thanks, but NO THANKS Amazon!

    5. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by aarrieta · · Score: 3, Informative

      ..also 53 is DNS port number :-)

    6. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by hawguy · · Score: 0

      Exactly, they showed their true colors in the way that they handled the WikiLeaks affair / pressure from the government. Thanks, but NO THANKS Amazon!

      Yes, it's amazing that a US based company would refuse to host content that has been deemed illegal by the US Government. Their terms of use are pretty clear ...or we otherwise determine, in our sole discretion, that you may be using AWS Services for any illegal purpose or in a way that violates the law or violates, infringes, or misappropriates the rights of any third party; (viii) we determine, in our sole discretion, that our provision of any of the Services to you is prohibited by applicable law, or has become impractical or unfeasible for any legal or regulatory reason. The US Gov't has declared that the data is illegal, so it seems that Amazon was well within its rights to enforce their ToU -- especially since they would likely face legal percussions from the US Gov't if they did not take down the content -- or at the very least would be subject to repeated DoS attacks.

      While I think Wikileaks is doing the right thing, I don't think there is any dispute that the diplomatic cables were obtained illegally and are not legal for distribution in this country.

      What did you expect Amazon to do? Is there another ISP in this country that would keep the content up? Not that it would matter after the US Gov't got their bandwidth provider to pull the plug out of national security concerns.

    7. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Creepy · · Score: 1

      I really don't see anything wrong with Amazon's response - they got a complaint, checked on it, and it violated their terms of service. Remember that that wikileaks is hosting STOLEN US PROPERTY, and as much as it is fun to read about it, it was illegally obtained - if this were a pirated software site, we wouldn't blink twice if the DNS provider refused them service.

    8. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by nstlgc · · Score: 1

      To be honest, I don't think *YOU* got it... leet version of S3, pssh.

      --
      I'm Rocco. I'm the +5 Funny man.
    9. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Chapter80 · · Score: 1

      Woosh :-)

    10. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, 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.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    11. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I believe it had little to do with the actual content, and a lot to do with having a massive DDoS launched against whoever was hosting Wikileaks. Why take on a client like Wikileaks when you could host another client that doesn't have someone using up GBs of bandwidth a second in dropped packets?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    12. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      as doc pointed out below - the government declare anything illegal, but until a judge finds that to be true, it ain't.

    13. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by ExileOnHoth · · Score: 1

      God forbid an internet business should attempt to monetize something.

    14. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      really?

      when was that ever proven in court? What was stolen? Those diplomatic cables were never "exclusive US ownership" - by definition, they are owned by the citizens of the united states, not the government - We pay for these diplos with tax money. Have you ever heard of prior restraint?

      oh right, never proven to be illegal or stolen. good job making that leap there, fyi.

    15. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by camionbleu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Legally, Wikileaks' action is likely protected under the First Amendment. In 1971, the Supreme Court ruled (New York Times v. U.S) that the First Amendment barred the Nixon administration from keeping the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing illegally leaked information related to the Vietnam War. Two other cases (Landmark Communications v. Virginia and Bartnicki v. Vopper) support the view that it is not illegal to publish leaked information, even if the original leaking of that information was illegal.

      Of course Amazon is free to as it sees fit, just as we are free to choose whether to buy from Amazon. But let's not add support to Amazon's decision by pretending that this was about "stolen property".

    16. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's amazing that a US based company would refuse to host content that has been deemed illegal by the US Government

      [sarcasm noted]

      No, it's unfortunate (for Amazon) that they would announce a new service after so publicly having that happen to them. The fact is, US government censorship has been in the news lately, particularly with regards to DNS, and Amazon has been in the news lately as having bowed to requests for censorship. Whether you like what all has happened or not, you just can't think of both Amazon and DNS at the same time right now, without automatically having concerns about its reliability.

      the US Gov't has declared that the data is illegal

      I must have missed that story. I have seen a lot of posturing by certain politicians, and we have seen that some sort of pressure has been exerted, by someone which we all assume must be the US government. But as for it actually having been declared illegal, good luck finding any sort of formal decision. Nothing has happened in the courts yet, at least not openly.

    17. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you're the one who was wooshed. Just think about it.

    18. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by bberens · · Score: 2

      Because high bandwidth customers are likely quite profitable?

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    19. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yeah, denial of service attacks make Amazon big bucks. A high bandwidth customer may be profitable. A high bandwidth denial of service attack is not going to result in more profit for Amazon.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    20. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, 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).

    21. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better: A fair portion of Illinois Route 53 is part of the old US Route 66 (from about Bolingbrook down to Gardner where the old route merges into the current Interstate 55).

    22. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by bberens · · Score: 1

      If you reasonably believe you will be able to collect the costs of bandwidth from the AWS customer that was chewed up by the DDOS, I don't see what difference it makes whether the bandwidth was legitimate or not. I'm not in a market where these decisions are made so I may be way off, but I considered AWS to be an interesting tool against DDOS because you could theoretically ramp up to overcome the attack. Apparently not.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    23. Re:We see what you did there Amazon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon and paypal are both now blocking wikileaks, who have not been found guilty in court of anything yet, in any country.
      Paypal and visa did the same thing to allofmp3.com by blocking access to billing and funds, even though they were operating within their own countries laws.
      Wake up USA, you are becoming heavily censored.

  2. Spamvertisement by regular_gonzalez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cool, thanks for the PR release wiredmikey

    --
    Due to circumstances beyond my control, I am master of my fate and captain of my soul.
    1. Re:Spamvertisement by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 2

      The light bill doesn't pay itself.

      Taco at least meters them in as opposed to flooding the front page. Unless a new iPod comes out or the like, then all bets are off.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    2. Re:Spamvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Given the recent news around Amazon and Wikileaks, I'd say this is more like a comment laxative.

    3. Re:Spamvertisement by wiredmikey · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, the full press release with all the clutter and no information on the API, etc. is here: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=176060&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1504334&highlight=

    4. Re:Spamvertisement by Aceticon · · Score: 0

      I set wiredmikey as Foe - can't stand this kind of s*it.

      My first /. Foe ever: gotta go celebrate now.

      Does this mean I won't see any more articles submitted by him in the main page?

    5. Re:Spamvertisement by theskipper · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the update. We'll be waiting anxiously for further updates.

    6. Re:Spamvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      Not much of a comment laxative apparently, but then the # of comments in a story seems kinda opposite of what one would expect for a 'geek techy site'
      • Discovered life on moon of Jupiter leads to breakthrough in Quantum Computation and Fusion Technology (54 comments)
      • A mayor of some dinky, backwater, forgotten town says something stupid; all Americans are assumed to share same stupid belief. (572 comments)
    7. Re:Spamvertisement by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Is there some reason the blurb couldn't have just said "Amazon launches new DNS service for sites hosted on their cloud services"?

    8. Re:Spamvertisement by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      They posted it to give us a chance for lulz.

      I mean, really. Is ANYONE reading this going to think "what a great idea, I'll just sign my DNS up with Amazon"?

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    9. Re:Spamvertisement by ExileOnHoth · · Score: 1

      Fine, I'll bite, I can afford the karma hit.

      I've been looking for a new DNS host. And it's funny, I actually clicked on this story thinking I'd get to read some informed comments about the pluses and minuses of Amazon's new service from people who would know.

      Amazon "cloud" hosting services - popular with geeks, used by employed developers everywhere.

      Slashdot - a place where informed geeks talk about technical matters.

      See how I could easily have made that mistake?

      But I forgot, sometimes on slashdot the world is divided into "good corporations" (!?) and "evil corporations" and Amazon (for cancelling the account of a high profile customer who was violating their terms of service) has now been labeled "evil" and therefore we can't talk about their technology anymore.

      Amazon does stuff I like and stuff I don't. Just like Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, et al. And just about every other corporation in technology.

      Are you guys honestly implying that Amazon whipped up and rolled out this new service over the weekend to, like, change the subject re: wikileaks? Perhaps you need to take a step back and look around.

      I live in Seattle and know lots of people who work at Amazon. They aren't fascists or CIA agents (as far as I know). They're geeks who program cool stuff and sell it to make a living. Amazon cloud stuff (despite the name) is cool, and of general interest to anyone who does this for a living. A new service from them is of interest to this geek, anyway.

      Sheesh, people.

    10. Re:Spamvertisement by regular_gonzalez · · Score: 1

      I'm a huge fan (in general) of Amazon. Spent more money there than I care to think on. That's irrelevant. The /. story was either a verbatim PR release or written by a PR stooge to be as banal and self-aggrandizing as possible. It wasn't intended to spur discussion but to advertise a product. The submission was obviously not along the lines of "Hey guys, here's a new DNS host, what do you think will be the advantages and disadvantages compared to OpenDNS et al?" That's fine, great, if you want to advertise your product by passing it off as a news article, when there is a clear difference between the two, be prepared to be mocked for doing so.

      --
      Due to circumstances beyond my control, I am master of my fate and captain of my soul.
    11. Re:Spamvertisement by ExileOnHoth · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Okay. You may be right. The overall good-vs-evil tone of the conversation and wikileaks fixation so irked me that I kind of glossed over this.

      On the other hand, if a major tech vendor releases a new service that may be something newsworthy. No? Do we not consider it news when apple or google do something new? Should we? (Maybe I don't know the answer to that!)

      I guess I clicked on the story kind of hoping to find out what slashdotters think about the new service. To find out if there is anything compelling in the new service. And instead I found slashdot's wikileaks fixation annoying.

      But maybe you're right, and this never should have been a story. Maybe verbatim posting of press releases is better left to the likes of cnet etc!

    12. Re:Spamvertisement by initialE · · Score: 1

      No, obviously I do want to know what they sell. Especially when they try to sell it under a different name. All the better to not buy it with.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  3. Sounds great for WikiLeaks by burki · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since EasyDNS couldn't handle them anymore. Oh wait, wasn't there a problem with Amazon to start with?

    1. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by elsurexiste · · Score: 2

      Since EasyDNS couldn't handle them anymore. Oh wait, wasn't there a problem with Amazon to start with?

      Yeah, I thought that too. They announced this just after kicking Wikileaks out. It does give you an idea of how reliable that DNS service is.

      Screw them.

      --
      I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    2. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Now when we talk about Amazon, we immediately think about the wikileaks debacle. I wonder if this is only because we follow geek news or if the mainstream knows about it. In which case the call to boycott amazon for christmas maybe very effective.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    3. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by maztuhblastah · · Score: 2

      Since EasyDNS couldn't handle them anymore. Oh wait, wasn't there a problem with Amazon to start with?

      You got the company wrong! EasyDNS actually has volunteered to take on WikiLeaks as a customer. It was *EveryDNS* that bowed to the US government and dropped WikiLeaks.

      --
      The real litigious bastards...
    4. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Stunt+Pope · · Score: 1

      It was NOT easyDNS who "couldn't handle them", jeezus, you must be the LAST person alive on the planet who doesn't know this yet.

      EVERYDNS unplugged wikileaks. NOT easyDNS. http://easyurl.net/a3191

      In fact, as of yesterday wikileaks.ch ADDED easyDNS to their DNS.

    5. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      In reality, boycotts are rarely effective. Especially against a giant corporation like Amazon. Do you think 90% of your average consumers know or care about Wikileaks? And if they do know, are they willing to spend more money at another site just to make a political statement? I think you over estimate greatly the intelligence and resolve of the average internet consumer.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    6. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Stunt+Pope · · Score: 1

      It was not easyDNS who "couldn't handle them", EVERYdns unplugged them. Not easyDNS

      In fact wikileaks.ch started using easyDNS yesterday, wikileaks.nl will start tomorrow.

    7. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Xyde · · Score: 1

      EveryDNS.

    8. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by stdarg · · Score: 1

      Things don't always cost more at other sites. For instance, a new Xbox game at Amazon is the same price as a new Xbox game at Newegg. I buy from Amazon out of familiarity and habit. It's my default. I kind of hope Amazon suffers because of their behavior over this. And certainly I would never, ever use EasyDNS after this. You'd have to be crazy to.

    9. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      I believe PR can hurt. Actually I believe enough in capitalism to believe boycotts can work.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    10. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure it was EveryDNS, not EasyDNS that dropped WikiLeaks.

      I use EasyDNS for my domains and would be upset if they did something like that. But, in my experience, they're awesome in almost every way possible.

    11. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I believe more in the apathy and ignorance of consumers than I do in consumers making informed purchases based on their beliefs. If people in the US were really that conscientious of their shopping choices, how can places like Wal-Mart thrive? Sure they may have the lowest prices, but what are the real costs when 80% of your products are made in China?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    12. Re:Sounds great for WikiLeaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      asshat, learn to read. EVERY DNS couldnt handle them, and morons like you cant read properly. fix your godamn brain.

      EasyDNS actually stepped up to handle Wikileaks DNS, here's the logic:

      public who cant read: "EasyDNS dropped Wikileaks shame on them!"
      easyDNS: "Uh EVERY DNS ISNT US. Learn to read?"
      public who cant read: "oh, uh, well, why DONT you host it then, are you AGAINST WIKILEAKS OR SOMETHING?!"
      easyDNS: "Fsck sakes, you people. FINE, we'll host it."

      So, yes, EASY DNS is now HOSTING WIKILEAKS. Are you happy?

      Go spend some money on EasyDNS registrations now as pennance. If you want more details read the presidents blog.

  4. Imma jump right on this... by xTantrum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so when they decide they don't like my business model/price structure/web site/looks/colour/wtv they can shut my service down pronto. Yup, thanks Amazon where can I sign up?? Idiots.

    --
    $action = empty(PHP) ? backToC() : unset(PHP) ; "when the concrete cases are understood, the abstractions are readily
    1. Re:Imma jump right on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got news. So can every other service provider that exists on the internet/web. Unless you're forking out $$$ for hosting and arrangements -- far more than you make in a year -- then you're not paying for guaranteed assurance contracts.

    2. Re:Imma jump right on this... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      WTV?

    3. Re:Imma jump right on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WhaTeVer?

    4. Re:Imma jump right on this... by Unordained · · Score: 1

      German: "what the vuck"?

  5. really? by hey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "A reliable, cloud-based DNS service has been one of the most requested offerings by our customers" ... really?

    1. Re:really? by xSauronx · · Score: 2

      Well, comcast is going to be *all* over this one...

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    2. Re:really? by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, probably. If you're already running all their services, do you really want to manage BIND or equivalent by yourself? Linode offers DNS for their VM service, I'm sure others do too.

    3. Re:really? by Striikerr · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. I evaluated using AWS for some production systems and it's horrible (it felt like it was still in a beta test stage). I would have assumed that the most user requested feature would have been to offer up-to-date server images running on their EBS (non-ephemeral) storage or at least provide a supported method for migrating server images from the instance-based storage to the permanent storage.

    4. Re:really? by Hartree · · Score: 2

      Comcast needs to be all over something. Last night was just one of a series of troubles with dns they've had.

    5. Re:really? by nicholas22 · · Score: 1

      "A reliable, cloud-based DNS service has been one of the most requested offerings by our customers" ... really?

      That was about 1-2 months ago, but I suspect that with the whole WikiLeaks debacle, those customers are probably looking elsewhere...

    6. Re:really? by jgagnon · · Score: 0

      I think many of you are being way too hard on Amazon for this WikiLeaks thing. Considering the US government considers WikiLeaks a terrorist organization, please name one US company that would have not caved. And then tell me what that company is doing to help WikiLeaks.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    7. Re:really? by dmabram · · Score: 1

      Yes, really, although perhaps the description isn't clear. For users of Amazon's EC2 cloud based servers, it is necessary to configure DNS services externally when firing up new instances. This is a small hassle. Having an integrated service that automagically does correct DNS configurations when new instances are launched and does some routing magic to send users to instances that are geographically close is really great for existing users of EC2.

    8. Re:really? by Creepy · · Score: 1

      yeah - I switched my mom from Comcast to google DNS (8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4) when she couldn't get through to support - I wasn't near a computer at the time and I remembered that one off the top of my head.

    9. Re:really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but DNS is the one well-known distributed database online that actually works well, doesn't have much issue with being cloud-based, is low-bandwidth enough not to really need to be cloud-based for most purposes, and would be relatively easy to setup if you wanted to make it cloud-based yourself.

    10. Re:really? by thej1nx · · Score: 1

      Google.

    11. Re:really? by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      Google has caved to the government on several occasions. What are you smoking?

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    12. Re:really? by thej1nx · · Score: 1

      I guess you didn't understand. Try to actually google "wikileaks" right now. Take a look at the result. Google is managing where Amazon failed. And I doubt US govt. can actually do anything about this.

    13. Re:really? by asvravi · · Score: 2

      Spinelessly caving in to secret threats from a fascist individual amounts to playing with your constitutional rights and deserves to be derided. People would not have been hard at all on Amazon if they were responding to a formal legal notice from government, based on a properly adjudicated case.

      Whether there is or not a US company that can take on the US government is irrelevant to the result. Any company that does what Amazon did must be and will be hauled up by the people.

      Arguments such as yours only serve to undermine the very fabric of democracy and fly against the critical concept of independence of legislature, judiciary and executive that is so fundamental to effective democracy.

    14. Re:really? by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      My point is that many of you are being too hard on Amazon. You want to fight the real fight in this then fight the government, not the businesses. Businesses make decisions based on their bottom line (most of the time) so will "cave" as you say on what they perceive as a threat to it.

      Beat up the government or those in it that make these kinds of threats and/or decisions. Simply put, yelling at the companies for doing what the government tell them to do will get you nowhere (or at least close enough to it).

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    15. Re:really? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      "A reliable, cloud-based DNS service has been one of the most requested offerings by our /former/ customers"

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  6. Hmmm.... by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The biggest reason I can think of for using an alternative DNS is independence from governments. Since Amazon clearly bows to US government pressure and removed wikileaks I see it as a failure on this front.

    1. Re:Hmmm.... by hedwards · · Score: 2

      To be fair, I'm not sure that they bowed to the US government or all those morons that view Wikileaks as a threat to US national security on par with Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Ladin.

      It's hard to say, but the latter probably can exert enough pressure that the US government wouldn't have to. Not that I have any idea which it is.

    2. Re:Hmmm.... by AndrewNeo · · Score: 3, 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.

    3. Re:Hmmm.... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Right. Which is why the original poster said that using an alternative DNS (such as the one proposed by the piratebay founders, among other projects out there) is a good solution to being relieved of the censorship and control of government controlled DNS:

      http://www.zeropaid.com/news/91415/pirate-bay-co-founder-proposes-alternative-p2p-dns/

      Of course, I'm not sure how that solves the problem. What are there, like three backbones in the nation? Or at worse, at the ISP level, a few ISPs blocking traffic to any non-sanctioned resolver solution would probably block 95% of the traffic in the country, so . . . sort of doesn't really solve anything, when it comes down to it.

    4. Re:Hmmm.... by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      No, that's not what I meant. You and the GP are talking about distributed DNS that a client uses. For example, at home I use my ISP's DNS servers. This is what we want alternative DNS for, and I don't disagree with you. However, Amazon's service is for DNS nameservers. When I own a domain, I point the nameservers at ns1.example.com, ns2.example.com, which officially say that example.com points at 192.168.1.1. This is the service Amazon is hosting. You could do this at several places, but instead of hosting it yourself on your own server using BIND, or depending on someone else externally, you can use Amazon just like you are EC2 for your DNS.

    5. Re:Hmmm.... by aztracker1 · · Score: 2

      Fair enough.. but as far as Amazon's infrastructure, it's on par with any other customer... The power company doesn't care that you use electricity to allow your DVD player and TV to show you porn.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    6. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up, mod GP down

    7. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon keeps selling a book that teaches you how to make love to a child but takes down wikileaks?

    8. Re:Hmmm.... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Amazon keeps selling a book that teaches you how to make love to a child but takes down wikileaks?

      Yes I think they should ban the Qur'an too

  7. Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by surveyork · · Score: 2

    Hahahaha! Really, Amazon... *breathless* This is a really good practical joke, seriously. You boot sites from your cloud when someone tells you to and now you want people to trust your DNS! Oh, and yesterday I cancelled my PayPal & Amazon accounts. Keep up the good job! Now we see the true colors of these companies (until now, they were just an educated guess). We see what you did there, Amazon. We all know it. Shame on you.

    --
    2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
    1. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Hartree · · Score: 1

      Uh... I'm sure Bezos is just terrified of losing your and a few other accounts.

      And you're just twigging to the nature of large businesses? Ah. Before this you believed them when they said things like "Don't be evil."?

    2. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by surveyork · · Score: 2

      Say whatever you want. I know I'm insignificant to them, but I felt the need to do something for a change. I'm not the only one. There's also the bad PR. And no, I never completely believed Google's motto. Just look at what they're planning for wireless internet: the end of net neutrality. All companies are evil, some are less evil than others. Have a nice time being cynical and doing nothing. That's why we can't have nice things.

      --
      2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
    3. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Magada · · Score: 1

      It's a cheap way to inflict some small amount of financial loss and to assuage one's consciousness by not supporting the guilty. It's better than nothing, iow. What's your problem?

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    4. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Hartree · · Score: 1

      Oh, I agree that doing it makes you feel better, and it's harmless. It's just not a very effective riposte.

      On most tech related issues the large mass of people are not only going to do nothing but aren't even going to be cynical about it.

      Unless it can be made to connect to them in a way they feel, why should they? Example: I can get all worked up over funding for some esoteric physics research that will have a good effect, but most people will have no idea about it. To expect them to pick up that torch is unrealistic. So too is this.

      "That's why we can't have nice things."

      Y'know, the religious right said the same thing about not boycotting Disney because they have a day for gays, or not supporting Prop 8. They felt just as strongly about it as you do about this.

      I thought they were being silly.

      At least your pet cause is a more less objectionable one than that one. But saying that because Joe Random doesn't pick up your cause they're part of the problem is an old and very tired saw that's been used for causes both good and bad.

      Now, donating to EFF or other online rights organizations, or helping mirror the data, that's something that actually might have an effect.

    5. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by surveyork · · Score: 1

      You're implying too much. My take on the issue is that you and Joe Random can do whatever the fuck you want. I just told here what I did. If you people are so pissed off by it. Well, that's your problem --as long as you don't use violence. Now, continue doing your business and I'll keep doing mine. Slashdot: A place to make friends!

      --
      2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
    6. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Hartree · · Score: 1

      I think you read too much into my initial post. I'm hardly pissed off. Or even annoyed by it. You'd have to work much harder for that. ;)

      So, you can not patronize Amazon, and I can donate to the EFF, and I'll buy you a beer (or soda, or your preference) if we ever meet up.

      Fair enough?

    7. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by surveyork · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, I guess... Not sure if serious...

      --
      2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
    8. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      I think Amazon would be happy about you closing an account with PayPal - one of their competitors.

      This is more likely something aimed at the happy customers of amazon's cloud services - not places like wikileaks that could pose a serious legal risk for amazon to be hosting. Those happy customers will be happy to trust this DNS service. Sites like wikileaks probably won't trust ANY provider to begin with.

    9. Re:Very funny, Amazon! ROFLMAO by Hartree · · Score: 1

      Already donate to EFF. And, if you happen to ever be near Urbana, Illinois, yeah, I'd buy you one.

      Otherwise, as Sylvester Q. Pussycat says, "It's the sediment that counts." :)

  8. Unfortunately, their service has some bugs... by noidentity · · Score: 2

    ...bugs like not working when the domain name contains the strings "wiki" and "leaks", and possible others not yet determined.

  9. Yes i think i would use that ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

    after they kicked off wikileaks, like spineless, witless cowards after pressure from some fatass u.s. senator, and lied about it. thankfully easydns directly told what happened to them so that we know precisely who amazon caved in to.

    my apps, business, customers are far valuable to risk by using amazon's spineless (tm) services.

    --
    Read radical news here
    1. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by drsmack1 · · Score: 0

      Lets see how YOU hold up when a senator calls you and asks you to do something about one of your customers... oh wait, NOTHING you do is important enough for a senator to take of.

      Nevermind....

      --

      Humor from a Genetically Molested Mind

    2. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've always thought that the politicians were supposed to bend over for the corporations, not the other way around.

    3. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by drsmack1 · · Score: 2

      Either way works. They usually are pulling a train that loops around and connects to itself.

      The circle of life is thus complete.

      --

      Humor from a Genetically Molested Mind

    4. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Circle of shit, you mean.

    5. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      i wouldnt do flying fuck. im not american.

      --
      Read radical news here
    6. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were, would that change your choice? Because Amazon is, and I for one, don't doubt some very nasty things would start happening to Amazon if they had refused. Do you doubt this? I agree with what wikileaks has done. I wish it hadn't been necessary, but our government is about as opaque as it has ever been, and that's not a good thing. Trust but verify is a good way to live; You don't always know when someone is lying to you, or just plain incompetent, until it is too late. And we can't forget the US government has some history with terrible acts. It isn't like it is inconceivable they are actively doing terrible things even now.

    7. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      if i was amazon, that would change my choice. because, i am told i was living in a country that had freedoms. in addition, despite justice in america requires a lot of money, if i was amazon, i would have enough money to afford an army of lawyers to sue and participate in court cases on my behalf.

      so, all it depends would be the spine factor involved. amazon didnt have spine. facebook also got threatened, but they showed more spine than amazon. and they arent as rich yet.

      --
      Read radical news here
    8. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by straponego · · Score: 1

      Minor correction: EasyDNS never hosted Wikileaks; *EveryDNS* are the bootlicking cowards. Carry on.

    9. Re:Yes i think i would use that ... by netsharc · · Score: 1

      All about the bottom line. If Amazon had refused, Fox News, CNN, and all the other government-loving propaganda channels would smear them with so much shit that Amazon would start losing the Sarah Palin-loving "real American" costumer base (didn't her book make it to #1 on Amazon?) and even more than just that customers, since a high percentage of Americans think WikiLeaks is a criminal organisation and Assange should be assassinated without trial, because "We are the United States of America, and when we do it, it's not wrong!".

      Hey America, guess who's the new Soviet Union now?

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  10. But by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    And will they refuse to list you if they don't like your content?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:But by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Of course they will. So will most domain registrars. Your city meter maid could just sneeze in the direction of most domain registrars and they'd cut your domain. Don't expect pushback from them on your behalf.

  11. Route 53? Not good. by Old97 · · Score: 1

    I live in Chicago. In the burbs there is a Route 53. It's heavily congested and often under construction. Is this what Amazon is offering?

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
  12. Maybe that's by toxygen01 · · Score: 2

    what wikileaks should use instead of everydns =]

  13. DO NOT WANT by thijsh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry Amazon, DNS needs reliability and has to be *more* free from political involvement, not less freedom and more censorship like you will undoubtedly offer.

    Tagged: DONOTWANT

  14. An actually useful link? by isaacbowen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Seriously, use the summary to link to the friggen source. http://aws.amazon.com/route53/

  15. Trust the cloud! Trust Amazon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Lesson learned: the moment they decide they don't like you, they'll throw you out and keep your money. And, if the government decides it wants to know more about you, they won't get a warrant to come to your house, they'll get a warrant for your cloud host to give them access to *their* servers that contain your data.

    This is an oppressive regime's wet dream, made reality by subservient, amoral megacorporations. Combine that with the latest in taxpayer-sponsored CCD surveillance and what you have is Orwell's worst nightmare.

    So, screw you Amazon, screw your cloud computing services and screw the badly-timed release of your DNS offering.

    That is all.

  16. Amen! by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    When they fought the one click patent war and bragged otherwise, started publishing stats on what their .com customers were buying, and laughed at my privacy complaint (I have my own .com domain), I dropped them and found that almost everything they have, I can get cheaper elsewhere.

    They keep on pulling shenanigans like caving to the government over wikileaks, one excuse after another for being craven cowards and bullies, and I continue to wonder why people trust them.

    --
    Infuriate left and right
  17. Could be worse: by Hartree · · Score: 2

    Well, it probly was better than Comcast last night in the MidWest.

    They promoted equality by failing to return ALL dns queries for several hours.

  18. As long... by disi · · Score: 1

    As long as you do not have any problems with the US government ;)

  19. I'm sure it will be useful... by wcrowe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...until they censor your website. Wikileaks is not the only one with a problem.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:I'm sure it will be useful... by segedunum · · Score: 1

      Well, to be honest it's a case of 'what goes around comes around' where publishers are concerned. They've been exploiting writers for years.

    2. Re:I'm sure it will be useful... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Amazon is the new middle man, replacing publishers with their ecommerce engine. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

  20. Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by rolfc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wont touch them anymore.

    1. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by rolfc · · Score: 1

      I agree that this is a danger with the cloud in general, but in this case, it was Amazon that kicked out a customer and in this discussion we talk about Amazons new "reliable" service.

    3. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Duradin · · Score: 1

      How dare they make a business decision. They should be forced to do what we want. This is a free country after all.

    4. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as I am concerned, US is far from a free country.

      "When truth is treason, we are in big trouble"

    5. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, perfect business plan:

      1.do not listen to your customers
      2....
      3.proffit???

    6. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can make a business decision. I can decide to take my business elsewhere as a result of that business decision. It's called capitalism.

    7. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      And yet despite your smartass reply, Amazon--including S3, EC2 and their other hosting-related features--are making money hand over fist. Have you investigated the possibility that Slashdot is, you know, not a great indicator of mainstream opinion?

      If I were going to host a website in the cloud that leaked classified government documents, I would not use Amazon. For just about any other purpose where cloud hosting was appropriate to begin with, I would continue to consider them in exactly the same way as before.

      If you want to take your money elsewhere because you don't agree, you're more than welcome to. But stop pretending this is somehow ignoring consumers and a faulty business plan.

    8. Re:Reliable? Ask Wikileaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True but we as consumer's also have the choice on whether to support a business whose TOS become generalized under political pressure.

      Anyone know of anyone who started an Amazon/Paypal boycott? It would be interesting to see how they would respond to a mass boycott threat during the Christmas shopping season.

  21. Lack of features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No IPv6
    No DNSSEC
    No GeoIP coolness

  22. Unless Joe Lieberman doesn't like you. by VShael · · Score: 1

    Because his phone call to Amazon will function as a de-facto "internet kill-switch", just as little Joe has always dreamed of having.

  23. Note to all the crybabies out there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you're dumb enough to think that Amazon is some sort of liberty-infringing monster, I've got news for you: EVERY PROVIDER DOES THIS. There's a ToS that you agree to, and 99% of the time hosting "illegal material" is sufficient cause for terminating the contract. For that matter, "drawing negative publicity to the host" is (even if it's not stated) and "making the host network a target of DDoS attacks" is as well...

  24. Reliability? by McTickles · · Score: 1

    More like a liability! Imagine that, a company constantly dangling (much like GoDaddy and Paypal) some imaginary Terms of Service (need I remind everyone that TOS are of no value in court, they are little more than company wishes of good behavior and traps to get more cash from you) that can cut you off at any point day or night depending on their latest tantrum? No Amazon, you won't have me anymore in any way. Off topic: I started boycotting Amazon and Amazon Marketplace companies, Paypal I cannot boycott yet but will at the next opportunity, I am boycotting companies that registered their domain with GoDaddy, I am of course boycotting GoDaddy and whenever possible registration of US operated TLDs, and I am boycotting generally any American company that seems to be biased.

  25. Awesome by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Scalable, redundant and probably fast.

    But is it Lieberman-proof?

  26. Re:Route 53? Not good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in Holland, Michigan. There's also a route 53 here. It's well known for the glory holes, where a guy can get an anonymous blowjob, right next door to the geek compound.

  27. rjoshi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No more trusting amazon for web services. If they can't sustain the DOS (political), how can we trust? Lean from Wikileaks.

    1. Re:rjoshi by hawguy · · Score: 1

      No more trusting amazon for web services. If they can't sustain the DOS (political), how can we trust? Lean from Wikileaks.

      Ok, let's see what we can learn from Wikileaks. To me it sounds like we learned that if you violate the Terms of Use of an ISP, then you lose your website. But I think that you learned that Amazon is bad and some other ISP would have acted differently.

      I'll make a deal with you - identify a single ISP within the USA that would be willing to host Wikileaks content at around the same price point as Amazon EC2 (i.e. less than $200/month) and I'll buy the webhosting and mirror the Wikileaks site. If you think the $200 price cap is unreasonable, let me know what a reasonable price would be.

      If the site gets shut down and my hosting costs are not refunded, then you pay that portion of the costs.

      Sound fair?

  28. Fortunately, the significant stakeholders... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fortunately, the significant stakeholders don't see it your way.

  29. Amazon Rolled Over on Wikileaks. A Pox on Amazon! by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

    After the way Amazon.com rolled over on Wikileaks, kicking them off their servers, I don't know why anyone would bother with Amazon. They just rolled over instantly and did not even put up a fight.
    Julian Assange is the best friend Democracy has. All these so-called news organizations, with their bloated budgets, failed to unearth any of this stuff. To keep their precious "access" the modern TV newsreader does no investigation at all. Instead, we get celebrity news...

  30. Caching by Jamza · · Score: 1
    Their FAQ says:

    Amazon Route 53 is designed to propagate updates ... within 60 seconds under normal conditions.

    I normally wouldn't take issue to this, however their wording and context makes it sound like people will be able to see updates within 60 seconds. While it may update on their end within 60 seconds, after your DNS Servers cache, operating system's cache and the browsers cache, you are looking at atleast an hour depending on what setup you have. Fix it Amazon.

    1. Re:Caching by hawguy · · Score: 1

      I normally wouldn't take issue to this, however their wording and context makes it sound like people will be able to see updates within 60 seconds. While it may update on their end within 60 seconds, after your DNS Servers cache, operating system's cache and the browsers cache, you are looking at atleast an hour depending on what setup you have. Fix it Amazon.

      What is wrong with what they wrote? Route 53 isn't designed for end users who don't understand all of the caching points of DNS entries -- if I swing my DNS entry to point to another server IP, based on what they wrote, I know that within 60 seconds I'll start to see clients hitting that new server. And I know that I'll still see lingering hits at the old IP even after 24 hours.

      Amazon has no control over client side caching -- TTL is advisory, not mandatory.

  31. Re:Route 53? Not good. by hawguy · · Score: 1

    I live in Chicago. In the burbs there is a Route 53. It's heavily congested and often under construction. Is this what Amazon is offering?

    I live in Holland, Michigan. There's also a route 53 here. It's well known for the glory holes, where a guy can get an anonymous blowjob, right next door to the geek compound.

    I hope the Amazon Route 53 is more like the Michigan one - that one sounds much more fun.

  32. route 53 lacks some important features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    - route 53 is not reachable over IPv6 - No DNSSEC - No GeoIP coolness

  33. Nice TOS by formfeed · · Score: 1

    Wikileaks violated their ToS

    So? Don't give me the business at will crap.

    Many picture print services have an anti-blasphemy clause in their ToS. Does that mean, they won't let me print pictures of a bearded guy wearing a turban? Probably not, because Lieberman won't threaten them over that. But it still shouldn't be in their ToS.

    The proper way to handle things like Wikileaks would be a court order - expressing the will of the people, open to a legal counter-challenge, and a democratic discussion process.

    Not some blacklists, a corrupt politican's personal blackmail, or a company using their ToS to turn citizens into compliant consumers

    We had all this crap before. Some time ago one couldn't publish information on birth control, because it was "indecent".
    If things have to be removed from public speech, this should happen in a democratic process, not by some self-declared guardians.

  34. http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps you should actually read what Amazon had to say before jumping to conclusions of your own...
    http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/

    1. Re:http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/ by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

      1: What I posted replies to the comment asserting that "the US government deemed Wikileaks' content illegal". Amazon's given reasons are totally irrelevant to the fact that the government has not "deemed" that, as I detailed.

      2: Amazon's claims are also not believable. Specifically Amazon says Wikileaks has released 250,000 classified documents, though Wikileaks has released only about 270. There is little evidence that human rights orgs are the ones whose complaints Amazon is acting on. Those excuses are a smokescreen for a giant telecom/retailer cooperating with some people in the US government despite no due process proving support for these various claims. Meanwhile Amazon's servers sell books that are "damaging" to people every day, which is what Americans believe is protected by free speech so long as it's true.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they released all 250,000. They're just encrypted.

  35. They should've called it Route 66... by jon.mixnblend · · Score: 2

    If you ever plan to motor west, Travel my way, take the highway that is best. Get your kicks on route sixty-six. It winds from Chicago to LA, More than two thousand miles all the way. Get your kicks on route sixty-six. Now you go through Saint Louis Joplin, Missouri, And Oklahoma City is mighty pretty. You see Amarillo, Gallup, New Mexico, Flagstaff, Arizona. Don't forget Winona, Kingman, Barstow, San Bernadino. Won't you get hip to this timely tip: When you make that California trip Get your kicks on route sixty-six. Solo Won't you get hip to this timely tip: When you make that California trip Get your kicks on route sixty-six. Get your kicks on route sixty-six. Get your kicks on route sixty-six.

  36. peh by unity100 · · Score: 1

    Hey America, guess who's the new Soviet Union now?

    in soviet union, you, me, actually any citizen had not only the right, but also the possibility to get elected and rise to high ranks in government through democratic process. you didnt need money to mount election campaigns.

    in america, if you arent rich, you cant use your right to get elected.

    --
    Read radical news here
  37. Wikileaks is a small example by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Cloud computing has a major Achille's Heel: you surrender your infrastructure and data to another entity. I've got the same issue with the Google cloud on my Android phone.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  38. Overpriced by Golbez81 · · Score: 1

    There are other free DNS services that are probably better.... Zoneedit, twisted4life, HE.net (the best IMO)