Redundancy does not seem like an inherent component of sovereignty

lucideer 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It isn't but that wasn't the point. It's that sovereignty & redundancy aren't mutually exclusive

pwagland 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The UK, at least, is big enough that you can have multiple regions within the same country. There's a lot of distance between Glasgow and London, for example. Maybe not enough if both are targeted with nuclear warheads, but at that point, we have bigger fish to fry I suspect.

Most European countries have enough space within the country to do that, and, for most things, except banking typically, hosting within the EU is enough, it doesn't have to be within your own country.

▲

pumplekin an hour ago | parent [-]

Microsoft Azure has two entirely seperate regions.

A "full function" one in/around London. And a "tickbox" one for multi-region requirements near Cardiff.

The tickbox one has constant capacity constraints and a large number of Azure services aren't in it, but if you need to tick the "two regions and in country" requirement, you kinda/sorta can.

	▲	eddythompson80 40 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Ah yes, Azure is the undisputed heavy weight champion of ticking theoretical boxes.

▲

gentlerain 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

True on first glance.

But considering what these sovereignty rules aim to achive, and as someone mentioned, that the problem may be due to companies relying on a single region provided by a hypersclaler due to data sovereignity rules.

Then redundancy has to be considered by both the company and the rulers.