Live data from Hacker News

Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

github.com

1–10 of 133 posts

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#3
post #2

Sadly, I could never get the company lawyers to approve contributions under a CC-BY-SA. Of course, I'm not 100% sure I could get them to approve contributions to any external repo due to liability concerns, etc.

I feel you. The laws in many parts of the US and in some other countries should really change.

Luckily, in California the company can't really stop you from working on your own project or contributing to an opensource one.

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#5

One of the biggest lessons I've learned is that you need occasional EBS-to-EBS backups. Anyone that had to recover from snapshots knows the painful reason why...

Can you send a pull request with that tip? Many people would really appreciate it when they won't need to recover from snapshots. :-)

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#7
What I would consider one of the most important pieces of this guide is closer to the bottom (https://github.com/open-guides/og-aws#aws-data-transfer-cost...) where it covers cost management strategies. The Data Transfer Costs diagram makes the buried details of AWS networking costs stand out in a digestible way. I've read the AWS docs on this many times and still missed out on some of the nuggets exposed in the diagram.

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#8
The "use IAM roles for EC2" recommendation is a bit sketchy. The current security zeitgeist, not just after Colin's post but also after DerbyCon and Black Hat, is that EC2 roles are dangerous and, when under attack, not very predictable.

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#9

One of the biggest lessons I've learned is that you need occasional EBS-to-EBS backups. Anyone that had to recover from snapshots knows the painful reason why...

Why is it painful recovering from snapshots? (have just moved to AWS so have not experienced this yet)

Re: Open Guide to Amazon Web Services

#10
post #8

The "use IAM roles for EC2" recommendation is a bit sketchy. The current security zeitgeist, not just after Colin's post but also after DerbyCon and Black Hat, is that EC2 roles are dangerous and, when under attack, not very predictable.

Thanks for the insight! Would you consider sending a pull request with a note on that?
Post reply on HN