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

AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

aws.amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–377 of 377 posts

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#371

Post by dpacmittal »

hnarn wrote: post #352
MagicMoonlight wrote: post #333

I still don't get why we can't just expand IPv4 into IPv5 by adding some new blocks to the front. So instead of 192.0.0.1 it becomes 0.0.0.0.192.0.0.1 All existing addresses work, you simply append zeroes to any address which is too short for the new standard. Any old timey software still works as long as you use a router between the two systems with an old timey address. This would give us as many addresses as we wa…

This comment is just HN at its best. Chef's kiss. The Internet Engineering Task Force, a group of experts in the field, spent years and countless hours creating a new standard, but do not let that stop us from napkin-sketching up a new solution ourselves, I mean how smart can these experts really be?

I wish I had the ability to downvote, so I could downvote this comment into oblivion. What a shit attitude to have. Asking stupid questions is how you learn. You stop asking questions, you stop learning.

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#372

Post by albert180 »

preommr wrote: post #27
Operyl wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hobby customers aren't using AWS, by and large. And it's only a matter of time before we see more and more costs for IPv4 down in these tiers as well.

Counterpoint: My hobby projects all use AWS because that's what I am familiar with, and they have the cheapest prices. I also reuse a lot of resources like a database to further save costs.

AWS and the cheapest prices? Ehm sorry, but you will have a hard time finding something that's even more expensive than AWS

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#373

Post by hodgesrm »

hathchip wrote: post #288
hodgesrm wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Renting the same compute resources wholesale will cost you 20 times less. (Not a typo.) You mean like S3 object storage? That costs less outside AWS because you are usually getting less. That's if you can get it at all.

S3 is not a compute resource.

Right. But at least in my field (databases) many compute resources are useless without it.

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#374

Post by smileybarry »

doublerabbit wrote: post #142
smileybarry wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if all else fails, you can put something like Cloudflare in front of it to handle IPv4 traffic.

Which than you're back to paying $40+/year to ensure you don't get wiped from their "free" tier when they feel like it. Nothing is free forever.

I've been on their free tier since launch. Granted, it's nothing high-traffic, but a personal website shouldn't reach any "please upgrade" thresholds.

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#375

Post by strbean »

miyuru wrote: post #292
strbean wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found https://test-ipv6.com and: https://ipv6.ams2.test-ipv6.com/ip/?callback=?&testdomain=te... I get the following from Chrome: > This site can’t be reached > Check if there is a typo in ipv6.ams2.test-ipv6.com. >DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN

>>DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN This is because your OS is not querying AAAA records. I am gonna guess that your using macos. The most common error would be a "connection time out".

I'm not sure, but I believe I was on Windows 10 at the time. Shortly after this, I checked the appropriate boxes on my router (UDM-PRO) and my home network now supports IPv6. Passed all the tests on that website at least.

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#376

Post by [deleted] »

debugnik wrote: post #138
tptacek wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UDP is connectionless precisely so you can build novel stateful protocols on it. There’s no promise in UDP that you’ll be able to statelessly monitor it.

Which is why game networking libraries put a lot of emphasis on NAT traversal, forcing NATs to recognise the "connection". And why game console manufacturers tell users to just forward all incoming traffic unmanaged by the NAT to the console.

[deleted]

Re: AWS to begin charging for public IPv4 addresses

#377

Post by 5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV »

theamk wrote: post #194
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is it cost effective for people who need the resources? yes. There is no possible use case in no possible universe where AWS is cost effective. Renting the same compute resources wholesale will cost you 20 times less. (Not a typo.)

so I have an HTTP endpoint which gets maybe 10 hits per day, and does some lightweight computations and records small amount of data. Right now, this is done on AWS, with lambda + S3, and costs under $0.02/month. Can you point me to something more cost effective that that? Don't forget I also need backup for data, automatic failover in case of machine failure or crash, amd no maintenance (like OS upgrades) for 5+ yea…

Pipedream probably
Post reply on HN