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

Cloud Egress Costs

getdeploying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 318 posts

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#91

Post by dijit »

ailurooo wrote: post #52
thimp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a hilarious fuck up a few months ago. Company sets up an AWS hosted always on VPN solution. Connects 1000 staff through it. Celebrates how they saved $50k on the VPN solution. Gets $25k AWS bill for the just the first month of egress traffic. Turns out the data was leaving AWS egress three separate times.

how were they spending that 50k previously? a bespoke saas thing or self hosting?

Likely they are mixing timelines (one time cost or yearly cost with AWS’s monthly charges).

Cisco anyconnect VPN capable appliances (that can do 10GBE) are very expensive, and licenses are per user- so if an appliance needed an upgrade it is conceivable that it could cost $50k in the first year.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#92

Post by api »

kkielhofner wrote: post #90
api wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had people refuse to believe that bandwidth is actually very cheap and cloud markup is insane (hundreds or even thousands of times cost). I show them bare metal providers and colo that bills by size of pipe rather than transfer. They refuse to believe it or assume there must be a catch. There usually isn’t, though sometimes the very cheapest skimp on things like rich peering and can be slightly slower or less re…

Cloud providers have done an incredible job creating an entire generation of people who have no knowledge of such things. $0.09/GB? I guess that’s just what it costs. Expected when you’ve never looked at, considered, or even heard of things like peering and buying transit or even co-location. Enter 95th percentile billing on a gig port for $500/mo or whatever… Same goes for hardware. Want to watch something glorious?…

A big part of the problem is that software development has wrapped itself around cloud native. Sure that metal server has brain melting performance for nothing, but try provisioning it or running it. Nobody knows how and we are dependent on stacks like K8S that require an ops team to run.

The industry really found a way to stop the downward cost spiral of personal computing and bring everyone back into mainframe. Moore’s Law is not dead but you no longer see the benefits. The difference is just pocketed by cloud providers who will use the gains to pack more low performing VMs onto less hardware.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#93

Post by chrismartin »

zerr198 wrote: post #85

We moved to AWS a few years ago, after self-hosting our own storage for years. What a nightmare.. The egress fees were killing us, so we had to find something else. Being weary of these large tech companies, and being that these days we're more privacy conscious as well. We found a new startup that outsources storage nodes to individuals / businesses. You have to install what they call a "relayer" on prem. The relaye…

So, you went with Pied Piper? :)

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#94

Post by CaliforniaKarl »

dijit wrote: post #91
ailurooo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how were they spending that 50k previously? a bespoke saas thing or self hosting?

Likely they are mixing timelines (one time cost or yearly cost with AWS’s monthly charges). Cisco anyconnect VPN capable appliances (that can do 10GBE) are very expensive, and licenses are per user- so if an appliance needed an upgrade it is conceivable that it could cost $50k in the first year.

I agree. You're probably looking at:

• The cost of two hardware gateways (the depreciation cost, that is)

• The cost of 24x7xNBD (next business day) hardware support

• The cost of the user/session licenses (which might be depreciated also)

• The cost of software support/upgrades

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#95

Post by wmf »

sgarland wrote: post #88
zokier wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS charges for internal traffic too, both cross-az and cross-region.

The inter-AZ charges kill me. They’re charging you for traffic over what is almost certainly private fiber, of a distance no more than 50 miles or so. Just absurd. Then, they have the audacity to recommend you make everything Multi-AZ. “Don’t worry, RDS-RDS traffic isn’t billed!” Yes, but the apps running in us-east-1a that are hitting -1b and -1c due to load balancers most assuredly do bill for traffic.

Not billing for S3 and RDS replication traffic is also an unfair subsidy for those services.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#96

Post by amluto »

electroly wrote: post #79
PreInternet01 wrote: post #7

The cost of egress traffic is a very good reason for many organizations to not fully migrate to a cloud provider anytime soon. And since, unlike with storage costs, there doesn't seem to be an actual reason (other than: it makes migrating to competitors cost-prohibitive in a subset of cases), that seems kind of... weird? Small example: an actual company I do some work for is in the business of delivering creative ass…

If you still want to use some AWS services, you can get an AWS Direct Connect fiber cross connect from your data center rack to AWS, just like you do with your Internet connections. They operate Direct Connect in lots of third party carrier-neutral data centers. AWS egress over Direct Connect is $0.02/GB instead of $0.09/GB over the public Internet. You can serve customers through your unmetered Internet connections…

I can pay overpriced cross-connect rates in giant name brand datacenters, with or without terminating one end at Direct Connect. (AFAICT the $1600/mo or so for 10Gbps doesn’t actually cover the cost of the cross-connect.)

But that extra $65k/mo to fully utilize the link is utterly and completely nuts. My mind boggles when someone calls that a good deal. I can buy and fully depreciate the equipment needed to utilize that in a couple of days. (Well, I can’t actually buy equipment on the AWS end, but I can _rent_ it, from AWS, for a lot less money than $64k/mo.)

And I don’t believe at all that it costs AWS anything close to this much to operate the thing. I can, after all, send 10Gbps between two EC2 instances (or between S3 and EC2) for a lot less money.

That $65k is simply a punitive charge IMO. AWS wants me to avoid paying it by not doing this or, in cases where I can’t avoid it (e.g. the thing is actually a link to my office or a factory or whatever) to collect as much money as they can without driving me off AWS entirely.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#97

Post by hacker_newz »

njitbew wrote: post #65

Oracle Cloud only charges a fraction of want Google, Microsoft, and Amazon charge. Any idea how Oracle is able to keep the cost so low? Or are the others just inflating the price so customers don’t move to the competitor? In that case Oracle deserves a shout out for not applying these vendor lock-in practices.

Oracle does not deserve a shout out for charging market rate for their service.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#98

Post by wmf »

Fripplebubby wrote: post #63
_cenw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really depends on the quality of the peering you expect. It doesn't matter, until it does. Consumer ISPs sometimes do their utmost to not peer with open exchanges, and the entire thing gets even more complex when you go to places where bandwidth is more expensive (i.e. Oceania). There's a reason the favorite chart to exemplify value Cloudflare reps like to show is Argo Smart Routing, and why it costs about $100 pe…

I agree, and I would also put forward that most people don't understand what peering is or how it works. When people (usually developers who are not network engineers and have not worked at that level of the stack) talk about "egress", they mean delivering bits from your network (cloud or otherwise) to any other network on the internet. How can you put just one price on delivering a bit either to a host within the sa…

Transit is also the same price regardless of distance.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#99

Post by wmf »

zokier wrote: post #71

I wonder what would be the implications of AWS egress traffic increasing significantly (like order of magnitude). It is easy to rant about costs when you do not need to consider the consequences. Obviously AWS would need to build up their own network capacity, that's the easy part. More importantly they would need build up interchange infra too. This is the point I struggle to even imagine what the scale is like. Is…

If AWS has massive diseconomies of scale that calls into question the entire model of public cloud.
Post reply on HN