AWS Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Consultant
Top 20
2024-10-16T08:30:00Z
Oct 16, 2024
I'm not a network specialist, so I don't know the deep specifics of DNS and what might need improvement on an international level. However, it's necessary that any improvements adhere to international ISO standards. A general area for improvement with AWS services is that while AWS quickly releases new services, sometimes these services are not as mature as expected, which can be frustrating. It's often advisable to wait for version two of any new service.
Compared to Amazon, it is easy to find what you want in Azure and implement them. With Amazon Route 53, finding what you want is so much more difficult, making it an area where improvements are required.
The limitations of the tool revolve around the area of monitoring location, especially since the performance and selection options offered by the product are limited.
It is difficult to manage the product if the person involved in the setup process doesn't know much about the solution. From an improvement perspective, the product should be easy for everyone to understand.
Software Engineer DevOps at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
2024-03-05T14:02:41Z
Mar 5, 2024
The product’s security and disaster recovery features need enhancement. Additionally, they charge higher prices than other platforms. They could reduce the pricing.
The cost calculator for determining the cost of Route 53 is a little bit obscure. It is not straightforward. It’s difficult to model the cost. The cost calculator must be improved. The product must improve its analytics features.
Streamlining and optimizing processes related to Procter, VPN workflows, and other subjects based on specific needs would allow for continual improvement and adaptation to the evolving requirements of the system.
Director - IT Infrastructure at INADEV CORPORATION
Real User
Top 10
2023-05-25T08:34:00Z
May 25, 2023
Supporting DNS check is one feature missing in the solution. The DNS check support is not there in Amazon Route 53. The aforementioned details can be considered for improvement.
It may not always be easy to integrate with on-premise infrastructure, especially with the complexity of the resolver and other factors involved. Improvements could be made to enhance the ability to integrate seamlessly.
The solution should include more robust and secure services for hardening sites. Amazon is a public cloud with a very rich set of security features. But, in some cases we find difficulties such as network latencies in terms of hitting particular links.
I would like to see more customization or interface options. When we are looking at the model registry, it may be not clear sometimes. For example, if you use a single grid model and group or registry, it has a different SDK in the pilot. And it may be not so comfortable to use both of them because it is two different places for keeping things in order.
Route 53 would be better if it had the ability to handle multiple requests at the same time because we have a lot of users. I would like that to be optimized in the next version.
Amazon Route 53 is a highly available and scalable cloud Domain Name System (DNS) web service. It is designed to give developers and businesses an extremely reliable and cost effective way to route end users to Internet applications by translating names like www.example.com into the numeric IP addresses like 192.0.2.1 that computers use to connect to each other. Amazon Route 53 is fully compliant with IPv6 as well.
I'm not a network specialist, so I don't know the deep specifics of DNS and what might need improvement on an international level. However, it's necessary that any improvements adhere to international ISO standards. A general area for improvement with AWS services is that while AWS quickly releases new services, sometimes these services are not as mature as expected, which can be frustrating. It's often advisable to wait for version two of any new service.
Compared to Amazon, it is easy to find what you want in Azure and implement them. With Amazon Route 53, finding what you want is so much more difficult, making it an area where improvements are required.
The limitations of the tool revolve around the area of monitoring location, especially since the performance and selection options offered by the product are limited.
Since DNS is based on internet access, improving some security features would improve internet quality worldwide.
The solution’s pricing could be reduced.
It is difficult to manage the product if the person involved in the setup process doesn't know much about the solution. From an improvement perspective, the product should be easy for everyone to understand.
The product’s security and disaster recovery features need enhancement. Additionally, they charge higher prices than other platforms. They could reduce the pricing.
The cost calculator for determining the cost of Route 53 is a little bit obscure. It is not straightforward. It’s difficult to model the cost. The cost calculator must be improved. The product must improve its analytics features.
The solution should have a more user-friendly user interface.
Streamlining and optimizing processes related to Procter, VPN workflows, and other subjects based on specific needs would allow for continual improvement and adaptation to the evolving requirements of the system.
The product could improve its price.
Supporting DNS check is one feature missing in the solution. The DNS check support is not there in Amazon Route 53. The aforementioned details can be considered for improvement.
The product should improve its automation.
It may not always be easy to integrate with on-premise infrastructure, especially with the complexity of the resolver and other factors involved. Improvements could be made to enhance the ability to integrate seamlessly.
The solution should include more robust and secure services for hardening sites. Amazon is a public cloud with a very rich set of security features. But, in some cases we find difficulties such as network latencies in terms of hitting particular links.
I would like to see more customization or interface options. When we are looking at the model registry, it may be not clear sometimes. For example, if you use a single grid model and group or registry, it has a different SDK in the pilot. And it may be not so comfortable to use both of them because it is two different places for keeping things in order.
Route 53 would be better if it had the ability to handle multiple requests at the same time because we have a lot of users. I would like that to be optimized in the next version.