Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing Network Service Tiers

cloudplatform.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 215 posts

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#21

Post by sitepodmatt »

yegle wrote: post #20
sitepodmatt wrote: post #18

I suppose this was inevitable, the costs of cold potato routing must be prohibitive, especially if we consider more exotic places, for example riding the GCP network from just a few milliseconds away in Bangkok all the way to a tiny GCP compute instance in London on practically all GCP network (exc first three hops locally). GCP network is awesome, I am surprised we are only see a small pricing reduction for standard…

I guess you are saying "the costs of cold potato routing must be prohibitive".

Yes, correct. updated, thanks

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#22

Post by fabian2k »

jstapels wrote: post #13

Egress pricing for Google and AWS (sans Lightsail) continues to be one of the biggest price differences between them and smaller hosts such as Linode and DigitalOcean. I think Google missed an opportunity here. They should have cut the prices more significantly for standard tier (sacrificing performance) to make this more competitive. Right now Linode's and DO's smallest $5 plan offers 1TB of transfer, which would co…

The extremely high egress prices for any cloud don't seem to have hurt their popularity much so far. So I suspect they all don't want to give up their cash cow.

Compared to a VPS or renting a dedicated servers, the egress costs can be enormous if you come even close to using the traffic contingent you get with many VPS or dedicated hosts.

Just as a comparison, a dedicated server with Hetzner for ~50-70 EUR per month includes 30 TB of traffic, which would be at least 2,400 EUR on the Google Cloud.

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#23

Post by pfg »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #10

So is this like the app engine price hike debacle a few years ago but with "better" messaging? So "Try Network Service Tiers Today" means "Migrate to Standard Tier today to avoid the massive price increases coming soon"? But fundamentally they just massively underestimated costs and need to find a way to adjust pricing. With app engine it was very conveniently beta, so they used the end of beta for the price hike. Fo…

They announced the new prices[1]. There doesn't seem to be a price increase for most scenarios, and the price is slightly lower for some. There appears to be a $ 0.01 increase if you currently push more than 1 TB, but less than 10 TB of traffic across continents or within regions like Asia or Oceania.

[1]: https://cloud.google.com/network-tiers/pricing#premium_tier_...

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#24

Post by yegle »

heroic wrote: post #2

> There are at least three independent paths (N+2 redundancy) between any two locations on the Google network, helping ensure that traffic continues to flow between these two locations even in the event of a disruption. As a result, with Premium Tier, your traffic is unaffected by a single fiber cut. In many situations, traffic can flow to and from your application without interruption even with two simultaneous fibe…

I think "unaffected" means "even with a single fiber cut, the connection still have sufficient redundancy".

With N+1 redundancy, if there's a fiber cut, I won't call the remaining connection "unaffected", since it's no longer fail-safe.

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#25

Post by pg_is_a_butt »

this is almost certainly related to GAE recent work on support web sockets from their various platforms. the networking layer was obviously going to need some overhaul to undo all the optimizations they did for their custom implementations for PHP/Python/Java based web apps. so, suddenly all of the optimizations that made the product a break even expense to drive adoption, it is now a product with much higher costs and potential for a single bad actor to spoil things for everyone.

so, they fixed it.

you're all idiots.

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#28

Post by jerkstate »

How is this different from paying more for a fast lane, which net neutrality is supposed to prevent?

Edit: there seems to be a bit of confusion what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the Open Internet Order of 2015 [1] which states:

18. No Paid Prioritization. Paid prioritization occurs when a broadband provider accepts payment (monetary or otherwise) to manage its network in a way that benefits particular content, applications, services, or devices. To protect against “fast lanes,” this Order adopts a rule that establishes that: A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization.

[1] https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/201...

Re: Introducing Network Service Tiers

#30

Post by manigandham »

jerkstate wrote: post #28

How is this different from paying more for a fast lane, which net neutrality is supposed to prevent? Edit: there seems to be a bit of confusion what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the Open Internet Order of 2015 [1] which states: 18. No Paid Prioritization. Paid prioritization occurs when a broadband provider accepts payment (monetary or otherwise) to manage its network in a way that benefits particular content,…

Nothing is being discriminated or artificially slowed down. You pay to use their private network. Standard tier means you leave their private network and move onto the public internet, which would be more open to ISP net neutrality issues if anything.
Post reply on HN