this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
153 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37730 readers
384 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
153
AWS: IPv4 addresses cost too much, so you’re going to pay (www.theregister.com)
submitted 1 year ago by pnutzh4x0r@lemmy.ndlug.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Cloud giant AWS will start charging customers for public IPv4 addresses from next year, claiming it is forced to do this because of the increasing scarcity of these and to encourage the use of IPv6 instead.

The update will come into effect on February 1, 2024, when AWS customers will see a charge of $0.005 (half a cent) per IP address per hour for all public IPv4 addresses. ... These charges will apply to all AWS services including EC2, Relational Database Service (RDS) database instances, Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) nodes, and will apply across all AWS regions, the company said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What's their rationale? Is there one?

[–] dan@upvote.au 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Their network admins are old and don't want to learn new stuff, or their networking equipment is old and they don't want to replace it.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

IPv6 existed when I was a kid. It is not even remotely new.

[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know, but it wasn't commonly used until IPv4 depletion became a more serious issue.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

I must've said this at least 10 years ago: the more people move to IPv6, the more IPv4 are left free, so the less reason for moving to IPv6.

The "migration" could easily take several more decades.

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We were talking about it when I was in undergrad.

[–] grue@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, but for all we know you went to college thousands of years in the future, Time Lord.

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

That is why I think IPv6 is a non-starter. ;)

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Compliance.

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

"Compliance with regulations."