Cloud-to-Cloud Migration

Cloud-to-cloud migration moves applications, data and supporting infrastructure from one cloud provider to another.
For example, this can mean AWS to Azure, Azure to Google Cloud, OCI to AWS, or movement between regional and sovereign cloud providers.
The migration can involve compute, databases, storage, networking, identity, security, CI/CD and operational tooling.

We are cloud agnostic.
We work across AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure and other public, regional and sovereign cloud platforms.
The migration design is based on the actual source and target environments rather than a fixed provider-specific method.
OCI itself now supports discovery and migration of AWS EC2 workloads into OCI, while Microsoft and Google publish dedicated migration guidance for workloads coming from competing public clouds.

Sometimes, but not always.
Virtual machines, object storage and basic networking often have clear target equivalents. Managed databases, identity services, serverless platforms, queues, analytics and provider-specific APIs may require a more careful redesign.
We identify those differences before migration and decide whether to use an equivalent service, keep part of the workload unchanged or replatform selected components.

The approach depends on data volume, change rate, network capacity and acceptable downtime.
A common pattern is to perform an initial bulk transfer and then keep source and target synchronized until final cutover.
For workloads with tight RPO requirements, continuous replication may be required. For less dynamic data, backup-and-restore or batch transfer can be simpler.
Microsoft specifically recommends choosing live replication or offline migration based on RPO and data requirements rather than using one transfer method for every workload.

They need to be included in the migration plan.
Large cloud-to-cloud migrations can generate temporary costs for data transfer, duplicate environments, replication infrastructure and parallel operations.
We estimate these transition costs alongside target infrastructure cost so the business case reflects the migration period—not only the steady-state cloud bill.
This also aligns with the Nubes research principle that transition, egress and dual-running costs should be included in infrastructure decisions rather than hidden outside the TCO.

We prepare and test the target environment before the production switch.
Where possible, data is synchronized continuously, dependencies are tested from both environments and production traffic is moved only after health checks succeed.
DNS, load balancers or application routing can then direct users to the new platform.
For critical workloads, we define maintenance windows, success criteria and rollback conditions before cutover. Microsoft’s current cross-cloud guidance recommends this same pattern and specifically warns against rushing testing or validation.

Yes, and this is common in phased migrations.
Some application components may move before others, which means dependencies must continue to work across both providers for a period of time.
We plan temporary cross-cloud connectivity, routing, security and data synchronization so this coexistence is deliberate rather than accidental.
Microsoft explicitly notes that during phased migration, some dependencies may remain in the source cloud while migrated components already run in the target environment.

Only after the workload is validated in the target environment.
We check application function, integrations, data consistency, monitoring, backup, security and operational readiness before source resources are retired.
The decommissioning plan should also remove temporary connectivity, replication and duplicate services that were needed only during migration.