apparentorder

I run my own CA and install it as a trusted CA via Configuration Profiles. This works fine, including iOS 17.

Does this break in iOS 18 or does this affect only self-signed (untrusted) certificates?

But did they tell you to "think about accelerating your adoption of IPv6 as a modernization and conservation measure" when they announced the charges? Because AWS did.

As mentioned in the footnote, this can be done by using PrivateLink; it costs a few bucks too, but it is the way to go if your VPC does not (or must not, for Compliance™ reasons) have internet connectivity.

If your target VPC has neither PrivateLink nor public IPv4 connectivity somewhere, I'm not sure how that would work; I'd love to learn how that was built.

Yeah, I was referring to AWS; I should have made that clear. ULA is frequently discouraged though, and NAT66, well ... just no.

I just recently heard that MS apparently has built everything IPv6 on Azure around NAT. This is so weird.

This domain is very, very old and at that time, the phrase wasn't usually associated like it is today. Not sure what to do about that.

ECS, ELB and most other services do not support IPv6-only subnets, as mentioned in the article.

ECS does support dual-stack IPv6, but most other services do not support IPv6 at all.

Indeed. I really don't like the thought, but I more and more believe that there is no other way to incentivize IPv6 at the "server side". The client (end user) side seems to do well, considering that Google reports IPv6 end user traffic of almost 50% these days.