31 ms·

IPv4 pricing

• aioprisan 5y ago
  This pricing is highway robbery, how is the incremental setup of an IP in a /29 (only 6 usable addresses out of 2^3=8) when setting up 8 (at $19/IP) total $152? I can see how the monthly rate would change, but upfront setup that high? I guess I won't be using Hetzner going forward..
  • asah 5y ago
    or... just use Hetzner for expensive servers, where the IPv4 cost is de minimus.
  • komuher 5y ago
    Did u even read the reasoning? IPv4 prices are rising for last 5 years (or even more) price increase is nothing new (my ISP is taking 7 euro per month for IPv4, few years ago it was 2 euro)
  • AndrewDucker 5y ago
    They want to encourage people to buy individual addresses if that works for them. Because that way they can offer them individual bits and pieces rather than having to find contiguous chunks.
  • oarsinsync 5y ago
    > I can see how the monthly rate would change, but upfront setup that high? Presumably this is to make it untenable for spammers to churn through multiple blocks of /24s at little to no cost. Also, a /24 is going for around $10k to buy or sell on the IPv4 market now, or approx 50% of their setup fee, making it much more economical to buy your own space, which is probably what they'd rather you did, since giving you 256 IPs means thats 256 more servers that they cant sell. EDIT: and before the response of "but I only want a /29", if there's no incremental setup cost to get a larger block, that approach will get abused by nefarious users. This is why we can't have nice things. EDIT2: ..and a /29 still means 8 more servers that can't be sold. There's opportunity costs involved in leasing IP space that could be better used elsewhere. As the cost of acquisition of IPv4 space goes up, so does the cost to the end user.
    • sascha_sl 5y ago
      >Presumably this is to make it untenable for spammers to churn through multiple blocks of /24s at little to no cost. This is exactly what it does. Hetzner Cloud will also, to the dismay of my ssh known hosts, keep assigning you the same IPv4 addresses until it becomes the LRU in their pool for a new customer so you can't do this.
• lmilcin 5y ago
  Wow. And to think that 20 years ago I had /16 for free and did not even think to keep it. I always thought IPv6 is just around the corner.
  • digitalsushi 5y ago
    20 years ago I was a student, testing IPv6 at the UNH-IOL and we also thought it was right around the corner. NAT has been so successful, that IPv6 is shocking to users who cannot even fathom why public traffic is being introduced to what was 'supposed' to be a private network.
    • icedchai 5y ago
      Heh. A lot of folks don't remember the days before NAT, when people had public IPv4 on their desktop. I worked at a couple of ISPs and one early startup that was set up that way. No firewalls, either!
      • dmitryminkovsky 5y ago
        I remember these days, and they were pretty ridiculous. One time I was playing Quake in middle school, talking some smack. Someone didn't like it and threatened to crash my computer. I didn't believe it. "Oh yeah, do it!" And they did. Got my IP from the server (the server listed users and their IPs) and bada-bing: BSOD! I was floored. I don't remember the exact Windows 95 exploit, but it was a staple for a while. It was nice when firewalls came out and you could at least have something between you and the Internet.
        • icedchai 5y ago
          Sounds like a mid-90's "ping of death."
          • deleted 5y ago
            [deleted]
          • 5y ago
• rtutz 5y ago
  This whole problem could have been avoided if IPv6 would be easier to memorize. I feel like especially when setting up networks, the v6 part is not as natural as v4. It is simply additional overhead and causes a lot of "scratching my head" moments. Otherwise there would be no reason to not leave v4 behind and just move on.
  • knuthsat 5y ago
    Any reason why having server infrastructure in only IPv6 is an issue?
    • gzer0 5y ago
      It would be a massive problem. IPV6 adoption and implementation was at a mere 33% (at least among Google users). [1] [1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
      • yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
        If you're behind a CDN, your origin can be pure IPv6
        • est31 5y ago
          Then it doesn't matter whether you use ipv6 or ipv4 with the private 10.0.0.0/8 space either.
          • yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
            Yes! If you're behind ex. cloudflare, you should 100% look at running pure IPv6 with no listening ports, just their service locally.
    • Hamuko 5y ago
      You want an IPv4 address if you want to be reachable by people.
• Hamuko 5y ago
  Still waiting for my ISP to actually implement IPv6 addresses for fixed connections. It's only been about 7 years since the Transport and Communications Agency issued a recommendation to issue IPv6 addresses with consumer connections.
• dtx1 5y ago
  I think this is a good thing. IPv4 must die at some point and its time for that. IPv6 has been standardized in 1998, 23 years ago.
• xvilka 5y ago
  At the same time IPv6 adoption basically stopped except a few countries like US, China, Japan, India, Canada, Brazil, and most of the Europe (sorry if missed someone). The rest of the world looks like simply don't care.
  • Hamuko 5y ago
    They'd care if they suddenly lost access to a bunch of services because they don't have an IPv6 address. The problem is that basically no one is going to cut off people from accessing their website just because their ISP is too cheap.
  • bluejekyll 5y ago
    Is most of this driven by mobile device usage and density practically requiring IPv6?
    • hanche 5y ago
      I asked my mobile service provider when they might start supporting IPv6, and got the answer that they have enough IPv4 addresses, so no plans to implement IPv6. The mind boggles.
      • ev1 5y ago
        This is odd/amusing, because in US as far as I know there are no carriers doing IPv4 anymore - it's all IPv6 with 464xlat or equivalent translation proxies. And these are companies with more IPv4 than your carrier most likely.
        • tialaramex 5y ago
          The sheer size of the US and thus the US market drives this in part. Suppose you're a "big" ISP in Norway. Maybe you have almost half a million customers, and your corporate growth plan says you want a million customers by 2030. Your engineers need a way to address all the backend infrastructure on your network. So, they give it all 10/8 addresses. No problem. "Do you need IPv6? Our customers are saying they want it?" "Not really, put it on the nice-to-have list and we'll get to it when we get to it". In contrast your American equivalent has 20 million customers and hopes to expand to 40 million customers by 2030. Their engineers ran out of addresses in 10/8 for infrastructure years ago. So there are awful, miserable hacks they can do, but just go to IPv6 solves the problem. And hey, since your backend network is IPv6 anyway, you can just as well give it to your customers. Once you bite the bullet, IPv6 first is actually cheaper. But most organisations aren't set up to think that way. The big changes resulting from the pandemic illustrate that. Can some (many? almost all?) of your office workers be more effective if they don't spend an hour every day commuting and then sit in a small cubicle most days of the week? The answer to that question didn't change from May 2019 to May 2020 but whether your employer knew the answer changed.
• m348e912 5y ago
  At this point I was wondering if it would be reasonable to use ipv6 exclusively. I figured ipv6 addressing is reachable by most by now. That's until I tried to reach ipv6.google.com and it failed. So I answered my own question.
  • the8472 5y ago
    Making hobby projects ipv6-only would be a start.
    • lvncelot 5y ago
      Since I'm using Hetzner Cloud for my hobby cluster, this is as good a kick as any to start moving that stuff to ipv6. (Although there's no mention whether HCloud ipv4 pricing is actually affected by those changes)
      • kaliszad 5y ago
        You should still get an IPv4 address with the VM for free. But you can make sure you support IPv6 anyway for the day, when even the very first IPv4 will cost extra.
        • lvncelot 5y ago
          Yes I'm currently using floating IPs as ingress addresses, and I'll switch to IPv6 ones.
      • smasty 5y ago
        Hetzner Cloud is adjusting the price for new CX11 and CPX11 instances starting on 1st September. CX11 goes from 2,49€ to 3,49€ excl. VAT, CPX11 from 3,49€ to 3,99€. New Floating IPs will also cost more from 1st August - 3€ instead of 1€. This does not affect existing instances and existing floating IPs. Source: Received an email from Hetzner as a customer with the affected instances.
    • cnst 5y ago
      I announced an OpenGrok-based search engine project on 2013-04-01, launching BXR.SU exclusively on IPv6 for the first few weeks of availability. https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2013-April/042334.html https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2013-Apr... IPv4 was added a few weeks afterwards.
• qalmakka 5y ago
  If only ISPs actually bothered giving out IPv6 addresses to their customers. It's 2021, I have a 1 Gbps FTTH connection and still no trace of IPv6. This is a complete disgrace.
  • tyingq 5y ago
    It's also very clear that it's possible, with the right motivation. Cell phone networks get it.
  • theandrewbailey 5y ago
    FiOS? I've been on FiOS for almost 10 years. Every few months, I check to see if I or any other FiOS customer has IPv6. It's been on in one testing market (or two) for years, but nothing else outside that.
    • thinkmassive 5y ago
      I’m FIOS with an IPv6 address right now. I first discovered this when I started presenting a terraform demo from home, and it broke because at least one of the AWS modules didn’t support IPv6. When developing I only used my Xfinity connection, which gives an IPv4 address. Apparently my laptop had switched to my other wifi Network right before the presentation. Luckily the interviewer was understanding, and we used the experience as a troubleshooting exercise.
      • deathanatos 5y ago
        I think you might be a unicorn. I'm also on FiOS, in a major MSA, and nope, IPv4 only.
    • drewg123 5y ago
      I'm on FiOS in the Richmond VA area with an IPv6
      • sodality2 5y ago
        I'm only a few miles from you and cannot figure out how to enable IPv6. Did you do it within the router admin page? Did you have to do anything extra?
• adevx 5y ago
  I remember while trying to figure out why Microsoft was blocking emails that IPv6 SMTP source addresses had a much higher risk of being blocked despite having done all the required stuff like PTR, SPF, DKIM. Microsoft's form to submit delisting an IP address does not even accept an IPv6 address: https://sender.office.com/ https://sender.office.com/ Stuff like this really hinders adoption.
  • nousermane 5y ago
    Anther example of big cloud providers not taking v6 seriously - AWS wouldn't even let your IPv6 hosts talk to their API: $ dig +short a ec2.amazonaws.com 52.46.140.46 $ dig +short aaaa ec2.amazonaws.com (no response)
    • usrlocal1023 5y ago
      They now have a dual stack EC2 API endpoint. But you have to go out of your way to use as it is on a totally different domain, and also it is limited to few regions. us-east-2 region for example api.ec2.us-east-2.aws https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/APIReference/Using_Endpoints.html#ipv6 https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/APIReference/Using...
      • colmmacc 5y ago
        Our reason for this is that customers may have IP-based rules in their IAM policies. If we silently turned on IPv6 for existing endpoints, those policies would suddenly break without notice. Hence new names and SDK options for dual-stack.
    • corty 5y ago
      Same with GCP, they just announced IPv6 availability for VMs in the last few days. Unbelievably you couldn't even get a IPv6 address for a GCP instance up to now! APIs don't work over IPv6, and lots of other stuff doesn't as well.
  • PedroBatista 5y ago
    Microsoft + Email has been a combo from Hell for many years, blocking IPv6 addresses, deliverability issues all the time, psychotic Spam detector, complete disregard for the most basic rules on how Email works and the list goes on.
• sschueller 5y ago
  Great, so now there is a marketplace for IPs meaning that there are people solely making money buying and selling IPs pushing the price up irregardless of usage.
  • eru 5y ago
    Huh? How does a marketplace push up prices?
    • cat199 5y ago
      the marketplace becomes full of speculators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
      • nybble41 5y ago
        Speculation might make it harder to get fixed IPv4 addresses for hobby projects, but in the long run it means there are IPv4 addresses available on the market for situations that actually need them rather than having them all tied up in lower-value services or ones which could have been done just as well over IPv6.
      • eru 5y ago
        Just allow speculators to short sell? In any case, a link to the so-called tulip mania doesn't answer my question, does it?
    • drdec 5y ago
      That appears to be the biggest reason BitCoin marketplaces exist
      • eru 5y ago
        Not sure. Eg BitCoin futures were introduced in December 2017. A new marketplace for BitCoin. And promptly, we saw a nice price drop shortly after. Perhaps that was because those BitCoin futures allowed short sellers to take a position?
• DrBenCarson 5y ago
  Just this week I tried to turn on IPv6 for my sister’s home network and guess what…even with FTTH it’s IPv4 only. Two decades later and we still don’t have a basic feature that we knew we needed three decades ago.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• jjice 5y ago
  I imagine that we're going to see more articles like this where IPv4 is getting more and more expensive until it becomes absurd. Once it gets too expensive, then providers will have a reason to supply IPv6 - cost. It's the only way I can see an ISP making this move.
  • gspr 5y ago
    Or they'll completely ignore it and start CGNAT'ing people on IPv4. :-(
    • p1mrx 5y ago
      It's generally a good idea to deploy CGNAT alongside IPv6, because that's what will eventually make IPv6 more useful than IPv4.
    • wmf 5y ago
      CGNAT has serious cost; IPv6 may be cheaper. http://www.asgard.org/documents.html http://www.asgard.org/documents.html
• tester34 5y ago
  do Departament of Defense of US and some schools still own a lot of IPs?
  • bradfa 5y ago
    Yes, but what's also interesting is other large IPv4 block holders who aren't governments. Will large public companies start selling off their address space to pad profits in order to appease/please shareholders?
    • tester34 5y ago
      I think organisations like DoD and schools should be force to give it to the pool if they aren't using significant part of those addresses.
      • JCBird1012 5y ago
        That’s a good way to suddenly get those organizations to magically start using those IPs suddenly - if you threaten to take unused IP blocks away, I’m sure those orgs will somehow find a way to “use” them.
      • MinorTom 5y ago
        They're using them, just not very efficiently. There are already rules forcing you to give up unused blocks (although they do not apply to some very old ones).
      • icedchai 5y ago
        How are you going to "force" legacy address holders to give up their space? Especially government agencies, which helped to build the early internet? Early registrations, pre-dating ARIN and the other registries, are basically property. You don't even get charged for them unless you sign a "legacy registration agreement."
        • sascha_sl 5y ago
          DOD-NET essentially uses their space as RFC 1918 space, they have never announced it. Property, in many cases, this one included, should be bound to making actual use of it. Some of nets (25/8, the CGNAT space) are essentially so established as private-equivalent, they should just be officially declared private. Connectivity to these will forever be spotty now that they made their way into corporate networks.
• TekMol 5y ago
  As a user, I have IPv6 disabled at my router. It is just easier for me to see xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx style IPs everywhere and avoid the cognitive load of IPv6. As a tech entrepreneur, I run multiple popular websites that have hundreds of thousands of users. I get emails from users daily. With congratulations, feature requests etc. So far, nobody ever requested IPv6 support. I have no idea what would happen if I enable IPv6 on my servers. Probably some desaster would strike because some of the code expects xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx style IPs. What would be the steps to test this? Run the application locally in a Docker container and somehow make the requests to the container go over IPv6?
  • mgbmtl 5y ago
    If you enable IPv6, and test it yourself (you can use an IPv6 tunnel if your ISP does not support it), then you should be able to quickly go over the main features of your site and see if you have any issues (IP logging, for example). It would be rather unusual to run a web stack that assumes strictly IPv4. Maybe if you have an SQL field that logs IPs, and a developer was very clever and optimized for IPv4, but that's pretty rare. I am a strong advocate of IPv6 and early adopter, but would never bother emailing a website about it. Even GitHub. For a long time, AWS didn't have any IPv6 support (I'm sure it's part of their business plan too, to charge extra for IPv4 eventually). As a hosting provider, the main benefit of IPv6 is that I can have unique IP addresses for my users. Nowadays, most people on mobile and more and more ISPs use a very small IP pool (CG-NAT), not to mention offices behind NAT (ignoring very large offices who use proxies).
    • TekMol 5y ago
      Well, it is not like I do regression testing by manually trying "the main features" of my applications. I have many hundreds of automated tests. But since my dev environment runs in Docker, how would I test IPv6? I did some googling now and it seems that would not be an easy feat.
      • blibble 5y ago
        give it a v6 address in the same way you give it a v4 address?
• metafunctor 5y ago
  Meanwhile, you cannot get a €2.49/mo virtual server from Hetzner without an IPv4 address…
  • sparkling 5y ago
    It looks like the Cloud machines are not affected by this price change?
    • TimWolla 5y ago
      The pricing change is only about additional IP addresses for a single machine. Each machine will still come with one IPv4 included for "free": > Our dedicated root servers will continue to include one free main IP; there will be no change here.
      • metafunctor 5y ago
        Yep. A “dedicated root server”, though, is dedicated hardware. They start at about 30-40 €/mo. TFA does not mention cloud servers (virtual machines) at all. Virtual machines from Hetzner, however, always come with an IPv4 address. For security reasons, I’d much prefer to get them without one (I disable the interface and firewall it 100% anyway), but it’s not an option to get a virtual machine without the public IPv4 address. One would think they’d provide that option if they are already hitting commercial limits with the IPv4 address space.
        • TimWolla 5y ago
          > For security reasons, I’d much prefer to get them without one (I disable the interface and firewall it 100% anyway), but it’s not an option to get a virtual machine without the public IPv4 address. I agree and hopefully without leaking anything: This is also an request within their customer forum [1]. [1] https://forum.hetzner.com/index.php?thread/28220/&postID=277468#post277468 https://forum.hetzner.com/index.php?thread/28220/&postID=277...
          • 5y ago
• halz 5y ago
  I wonder if part of this pricing scheme is to counter (or at least to short-term profit from and eventually change the behavior of) the provider being abused by spammers/scammers who could previously scoop up benign reputation IPv4 addresses from the far corners of the world and pull them over to Hetzner for very little $.
• codesnik 5y ago
  I wonder, if, with such a spotty support, and being forgotten and overlooked by many administrators, ipv6 is already a major attack surface
• orev 5y ago
  This is the inevitable and foreseeable result of the scarcity of IPv4 addresses, and it perversely discourages IPv6 adoption. Once something has a cost, it has the potential to become revenue generating, and once that happens the incentive for companies changes to preserving the revenue stream. At that point, why would they make the effort to provide a free alternative?
  • p1mrx 5y ago
    I think this is good news for IPv6 deployment. As ISPs start charging more for IPv4, companies will finally have a financial reason to seek the alternative. It's sort of like taxing carbon to make non-carbon energy more competitive.
  • skybrian 5y ago
    That doesn’t make sense as stated. The company offering IPv4 doesn’t get the revenue. It’s an increasing cost to them that they will try to minimize. It might make a bit more sense as justification to raise retail prices, but there is a risk that competition will undercut that price.
    • est31 5y ago
      It won't generate revenue but investment into ipv4 can be used to build a moat around your cloud business. Anyone who wants to compete with the big cloud vendors now needs not just a global network of data centers and good uplinks, but also a large pool of ipv4 addresses.
      • skybrian 5y ago
        Sure, if you already have the IP addresses then it's an appreciating asset. (Compare with Bitcoin.) Though, at some price, they might be tempted to figure out how to get by with fewer IPv4 addresses and sell the remainder.
    • orev 5y ago
      It would be very rare that any company passes the wholesale cost directly to the customer. There’s almost always some kind of markup, even for things like “administrative overhead”. Maybe that’s not widespread now, but the clear trend is reduced supply and increasing demand, so the costs will definitely go up.
• whoknowswhat11 5y ago
  Hetzner is a spammer / scammer hell hole. I didn't even realize they had clean ip addresses. Anyone spin up an instance recently and test deliverability?
  • Vespasian 5y ago
    Yup. No problem whatsoever. I also had several resources there for years. Never got anything to complain about.
  • ev1 5y ago
    Never an issue here, no blacklisting, no bad IP neighbours. If anything they are too picky on who they host.
    • whoknowswhat11 5y ago
      Good feedback - maybe I'm getting them confused with another of the AWS lite folks (linode or ...). I had a miserable time on one of these with just trashed IP address rep (but unlimited bandwidth supposedly).
      • ev1 5y ago
        Digitalocean used to offer unlimited bandwidth (not anymore). They are completely trashed, half on DNSBL, most people I know drop traffic from them due to relentless bruteforcing and abuse.
        • whoknowswhat11 5y ago
          That was it! Sorry hetzner! I remembered one of these players and just being totally shocked had how bad they were in this area - like no care - despite trying to compete with AWS. I don't remember if there was also internal to their network scan / attack stuff going unaddressed in addition to just issues with deliverability out (non marketing) but I honestly felt like I was working with kids vs adults a bit (this is some time ago though). I'd been told I was an idiot for paying for AWS and that there was lots to be saved on their unlimited bandwidth etc - but it ended up being absolutely not worth it. AWS support is really good. They seem to take abuse issues quasi seriously etc.
• logronoide 5y ago
  I have invested in cryptos, stock markets, startups… and probably the most profitable assets ever were several ripe ipv4 prefixes that we owned for years. Insane.
  • donmcronald 5y ago
    How did you get them? I checked a few years ago to see if I could buy a /29 or something small and remember thinking I couldn’t do it as an individual.
    • logronoide 5y ago
      We obtained them in late ‘00 for our tech company. We used them for several years, but the cloud was gaining momentum and we gave up using our own colo platform. We sold them in 2017, redistributing the benefits to the partners of the company as dividends. Fully compliant with the tax laws of my country, of course.
      • donmcronald 5y ago
        Ah, thanks. That’s kind of the impression I got. 20 years ago you could get them by asking, but now it’s much more difficult and you have to get them routed somewhere / use them right away.
    • hattmall 5y ago
      If you figure this out let me know, I've wanted to invest in IP/V4 for years.
    • 0x0000000 5y ago
      The smallest routable network on the Internet is a /24, so you wont be able to buy/own anything smaller than that, you would usually rent from your service provider.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• vince14 5y ago
  The problem I have is that IPv6 is unusable right now. Most server software cannot properly handle blocking of increasing IPv6 subnets. And not only that, but my ISP assigns the same /64 subnet to me for months. Who needs cookies anymore if you can just track the /64? Even unplugging the router for a day won't assign a different prefix for me.
  • mgbmtl 5y ago
    Cookies are used because people want to track users across networks. They might be on their mobile phone on home wifi, then on 4G, then at their office, etc. On IPv6, your OS should also enable the privacy extensions, so that your device has two IPs: a stable one for incoming, and a randomly changing IP for web browsing. Sure, it's the same subnet, but it would be silly to rely on this considering the many other ways we can track users.
    • vince14 5y ago
      This enables to track users not only across websites but across the entire internet. It wouldn't surprise me if there are already databases which map IPv6 subnets to real names, addresses, banking data, ... And anyone could just use that database or contribute to it.
      • mgbmtl 5y ago
        My ISP gives me a /56, and many provide a /48. That's huge. We are 4 people, each with 2-3 devices, and frequent guests on our wifi. Pretty sure such a database would be highly unreliable. And some ISPs rotate the allocated subnet, some make it static. You would probably have the same level of reliability with an IPv4 database currently ("IP visitor from a niche US-based ISP" is probably the same user, and you could dedupe by browser and other data). And then jurisdictions such as the EU, Canada and California would consider the IP address to be PII, and it would be illegal to contribute to such a database. Again, there are much more easier ways to track people on the Internet.
        • 5y ago
• sdevonoes 5y ago
  I'm still waiting for VPCs in Hetzner. In theory within a VPC you assign IPs in the internal range, so no need to public IPv4. I know this is not a solution for everyone, but at least for me it would mean: - 1 public IP for my nginx server - N private IPs for my application/db/monitoring servers within the VPC
  • fanf2 5y ago
    Use IPv6 only for your backend internal addresses
  • mrweasel 5y ago
    How would you connect to the servers with only private IPs?
    • sdevonoes 5y ago
      Via bastion server (which has one public ip)
  • hardwaresofton 5y ago
    VPCs exist in Hetzner and you can set up networks in Hetzner Cloud now and also even link with Robot -- they're called vSwitches and they can connect to Hetzner Private networks: https://docs.hetzner.com/cloud/networks/connect-dedi-vswitch/ https://docs.hetzner.com/cloud/networks/connect-dedi-vswitch...
• haolez 5y ago
  On a side note, I've had a terrible experience trying to use Hetzner in the past. I had some machines at Scaleway at the time and I decided to try Hetzner as well. I filled some sign up form and received a reply email that basically said: "We've evaluated your sign up data and we've decided to not do business with you. Your account was rejected and we won't review it again for the next six months." There was nothing shady in my sign up data. It took me a moment to realize that the reply e-mail was real. Crazy stuff.
  • mrweasel 5y ago
    Do you happen to know why they rejected you? It’s kinda weird that based only they would reject you based on just the sign up form.
    • haolez 5y ago
      No. I got a reply from an automated system with no reason whatsoever. They also state that they wouldn't read any replies, since they don't have the manpower to double check each and every account rejection.
  • nik736 5y ago
    Where are you from?
    • haolez 5y ago
      South America. This was clear in my sign up data.
      • notanormalnerd 5y ago
        I am sorry for your experience, but Hetzner is a european Hoster in Germany and mostly does business with german and european companies. Rejecting a customer because he is on another continent is a valid reason for me. The sole overhead of doing the accounting and even abuse handling for other continents is probably not worth the money. Maybe it isn't clear from their page and they should be more open about which markets they serve.
• kijin 5y ago
  Meanwhile, American datacenters are still handing out IPv4 addresses like candy. I know a few people who got 5 "usable" addresses with each dedicated server from a provider that shall go unnamed. That actually eats up an entire /29 per server. None of those people ever use more than 1 IP. The datacenter doesn't even bother to configure the remaining IPs on a default install.
  • fri_sch 5y ago
    So does Hetzner itself. Each tiny 3€/month cloud instance has a public IPv4 by default and no way to opt out.
• trulyrandom 5y ago
  Hetzner has always been one of the cheapest providers when it comes to pricing for additional IP addresses. I'm surprised it took this long for them to be forced to raise the prices. This affects me, but I understand why they have to do it.
• mthoodlum 5y ago
  There isn't an IPv4 shortage. There is just hoarding and mismanagement. RIPE and ARIN need to charge monthly fees to IPv4 address hoarders.
  • benjojo12 5y ago
    They already do in the form of the LIR and resource fee.
  • tialaramex 5y ago
    There aren't enough IPv4 addresses. It's not difficult arithmetic. It is possible for someone to be hoarding and someone to be wasteful and there not to be enough of something to go around. Those aren't distinct ideas only one of which can be true for a namespace. Let's try a little thought experiment. Abe, Carol, Emma, Gerald, Isobel, Kate and Mark are at the place. Everybody is hungry. Three pizzas are delivered. Each person will be able to eat about half a pizza, or else they'll still be hungry. Carol and Isobel announce that as Vegetarians they ought to have the two veggie pizzas. Carol eats half of hers and says she's keeping the other half "to eat later". Isobel realises her pizza has red pepper on it, she doesn't like red pepper and so she throws about half the pizza away as "contaminated". All five other people are left to share the Pepperoni pizza, they all still feel hungry after dividing it equally. Was there hoarding? Yes Carol hoarded half a pizza. Was there waste? Yes Isobel wasted half a pizza. Was there not enough pizza? Yes, three pizzas is enough to properly feed six people and there were seven people eating even before Carol and Isobel announced they were keeping the veggie pizzas to themselves.
• elric 5y ago
  I'm still waiting for Hetzner to support servers (physical and virtual) without public IPv4 addresses. I could easily free up the ~50 public addresses I'm using. One public IP will do, I can reverse proxy everything else. But there's no support for that. So every time I spin up a 1 vCPU tiny VM, which will never connect to the public internet, I'm wasting an expensive resource. Sorry.
  • GolDDranks 5y ago
    This! I don't see any reason for _internal infra_ to use IPv4, if it's under your control. At least AWS lets you have "private" IPv4's only. (Dunno about the situation with GCP or Azure, happy to learn about that.) But I'd gladly set up my stuff in IPv6 and expose only the endpoints in IPv4.
    • c7DJTLrn 5y ago
      Unfortunately the mantra of "ain't broke, don't fix" is law at some companies. Pushing IPv6 will be met with immediate resistance because it brings no benefits but does add the risk of something not supporting it yet.
  • zz865 5y ago
    I wish you could have your own IPv4 subnet with your VPC, like at home, with 192.168 etc
    • piceas 5y ago
      Zerotier is one answer.
    • metafunctor 5y ago
      You can; Hetzner Cloud has private networks.
      • elric 5y ago
        Well, yes, but in addition to that each instance also has a public IP.
• emilfihlman 5y ago
  Everything would be solved if we just made ipv6v2 which is ipv4 but with longer addresses.
• icehawk 5y ago
  Meanwhile I can't have them delegate more than one IPv6 address to a server. I wouldn't need all the IPv4 space if I could just do that
  • xena 5y ago
    They give you a /64 though, you can delegate anything in the subnet that way.
• dcow 5y ago
  Hmm so maybe the market will drive IPv6 adoption where the commons collectively could not.
• justinclift 5y ago
  GitHub Pages doesn't serve over IPv6 either. :( If your website/docs/whatever are on GitHub pages, it's IPv4 and a lot of the world can't access them.
  • DanAtC 5y ago
    What ISPs are doing IPv6-only? Can't imagine they'd still have any customers.
    • justinclift 5y ago
      Quite a lot of asia seems to be IPv6 only.
  • karmanyaahm 5y ago
    I moved off of GH Pages for that very reason.
• kstrauser 5y ago
  In related news, last week was the first time ever that Google's IPv6 traffic never dipped below 1/3 of their total traffic: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
  • fundatus 5y ago
    Germany's largest mobile network (45m customers) has been phasing in IPv6 over the past couple of weeks. Wondering if that already made an impact in this chart.
• dheera 5y ago
  215 euros a month for a /24? That's still pretty cheap
• DanAtC 5y ago
  Reminder that news.ycombinator.com still doesn't have an IPv6 address.
  • takeda 5y ago
    Yeah, and many other tech sites. It is kind of sad when even sites that are run by supposedly more knowledgeable people are standing in a way of adoption.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • oblio 5y ago
    HN is probably run on a Lisp Machine under dang's desk. And that was previously under pg's desk. Who am I kidding? As far as I remember Lisp Machines were the size of refrigerators :-D
• muttantt 5y ago
  OVH still gives them out like candy
• Pick-A-Hill2019 5y ago
  The Set-Up Fees are eye-watering. The monthly fee I can understand (but also feel there is a bit of mark-up on it to nudge customers towards IPv6). I guess since it's their service, they have an absolute right to charge what they like (and let the competition decide) but the set up fees are just not going market rates. Point I'm trying to make is - charging € 435.20 per month for a /24 is expensive but sort of ok ... but the € 4864.00 set-up fee? Seriously? It costs € 152.00 for a /29 subnet but it costs 32x MORE to set up a /24 subnet? Is it really 32 times more work to set up?
  • sascha_sl 5y ago
    Hetzner is a host living at a price and popularity point where they always have to consider massive scale abuse. I'd imagine this is a major incentive for long-term ownership of their freshly acquired IP space instead of churning them through customers to end up on every blacklist for every conceivable type of service.
    • ShrigmaMale 5y ago
      Very important since lazy admins just blacklist whole ranges or even cloud providers sometimes if there is too many abuse coming from it.
  • sneak 5y ago
    I think at their tiny margins one of their major costs in any sort of setup is going to be staff interaction/attention.
• jtchang 5y ago
  ARIN has been constantly raising prices on both IPv4 AND IPv6 registrations and fees. It's really annoying because you'd think you'd get a break for adopting IPv6 but nope. I've expressed my disagreement on the public mailing list but it seems like it is happening anyway.
• saulr 5y ago
  iCloud Private Relay, coming in iOS 15, does appear to be native IPv6. I wonder if this will have a noticeable effect on IPv6 adoption stats when it's released to the public[1]? [1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
• terom 5y ago
  Looks like they are also raising pricing for the cheapest cloud instances, and additional Floating IPv4 addresses. CX11 is up +40%, CPX11 is up +14% and Floating IPv4 addresses are up +200%. Existing instances/floating IPs will stay at the old prices, unless rescaled. Per email, no announcement link that I can find yet: --- Important customer information: Price adjustment for new CX11 und CPX11 and Floating IPv4 addresses Dear Client from the moment we launched Hetzner Cloud in 2018 we have continuously been working on expanding our platform and offering you an excellent price/performance ratio in cloud computing. Unfortunately, the prices to acquire IPv4 addresses have since increased dramatically and we have no choice but to respond. For a long time now, the pool of available IPv4 addresses has been almost empty at RIPE, the European IP address management agency. That's why RIPE stopped assigning IPv4 nets. Because of this situation, there is now a fast-growing market in IPv4 address trading with many active brokers, such as on https://ipv4.global/reports/ https://ipv4.global/reports/. Supply and demand determine the price at IPv4 brokers, so the prices have skyrocketed. We have tried hard to avoid passing on these higher prices to our customers, and have accepted the economic loss until now. However, the prices have increased so dramatically that we can no longer do this. We unfortunately must increase our prices. Starting on 1 August 2021, the price for newly created Floating IPs (IPv4) will be increased as stated below. Starting on 1 September 2021, the price for newly created Cloud Servers (CX11 and CPX11) will be increased as stated below. Product Price per month / hour up until now Price per month / hour, effective 1 Sept 2021 Cloud Servers: CX11 3.088€ / 0.00496€ 4.328€ / 0.00682€ CPX11 4.328€ / 0.00744€ 4.948€ / 0.00806€ Existing Cloud Servers are not affected by this price adjustment. Please note that these prices also apply to rescaling, effective September 1, 2021. Product Price per month up until now Price per month, effective 1 Aug 2021 Floating IP: IPv4 1.24€ 3.72€ Existing Floating IPs are not affected by this price adjustment. All prices incl. 24% VAT. Demand for IPv4 addresses will likely remain very high. And we will need to continue to purchase nets. We assume that the prices for IPv4 addresses will continue to rise, and that we will also need to increase our prices again in the future. Prices for IPv4 will likely remain high until after IPv6 has become much more popular. We are confident that this is still a good price/performance ratio and hope for your understanding. If you have any questions, we are happy to help. To open a support request, please go to the menu item Settings on your Cloud Console. We hope that you continue to place your trust in us as we are constantly working to expand our services and you can look forward to several new features that are already on our roadmap.
• azinman2 5y ago
  If I wanted to buy a block for speculation (thus helping accelerate ipv6), would it need to be crazy large to even be worth it? I imagine the buyers are less interested in 4000 ips here, 200 ips there, right? Like they’ll want /16, /8, etc?
  • oarsinsync 5y ago
    > If I wanted to buy a block for speculation (thus helping accelerate ipv6) IPv4 sells for ~$40/IP right now. The smallest block you can buy that is Internet routable is a /24. If you're buying, you're likely buying from another speculator, so you're not helping accelerate anything, you're simply a(nother) middle man in a (series of) sale(s) of a commodity, looking to profit until the block eventually gets sold to a user. None of that is said with any judgement, mind, as I've traded a /22 of IPv4 space for quite a handsome profit over the last few years. Just don't pretend there's any altruism or benefit to anyone else from your speculative activities.
    • JamesSwift 5y ago
      Is the speculation actually possible? I keep reading conflicting opinions. Some say anyone can buy a block via auction, but some say even then you need to be vetted as a "valid" owner by the registry themself. What was your experience?
      • oarsinsync 5y ago
        I became a member of my regional internet registry (RIPE).
  • AgentK20 5y ago
    Per ARIN (and pretty much all regional RIR) rules you're not allowed to purchase IPV4 space without proving the need for it, with a moderately thorough review process (https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm//#8-5-specified-transfer-recipient-requirements https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm//#8-5-specified...) Any other purchase reason is likely to result in ARIN pulling your "ownership" entirely when they discover it. From what I understand most of what's being sold off right now on ipv4 auctions are from companies who had too much IPV4 that they no longer need, or companies that were liquidated.
• exabrial 5y ago
  SRV records or a similar tech would end the artificial ipv4 shortage. Services run on ports, there are plenty of open ports. I get why Google and Facebook and the like are pushing the technology hard; it enables casual tracking of individual devices by third parties which are normally blinded.
  • maccolgan 5y ago
    What does SRV records have to do with the IPv4 shortage? Do you mean we should replace A&AAAA records with a IP-port combination?
    • namibj 5y ago
      Well, that's what SRV records do, so I assume it's what parent meant.
      • maccolgan 5y ago
        At that point how is IPv4+Port any different from IPv6?
        • namibj 5y ago
          Doesn't need new routers, just new endpoint software.
        • exabrial 5y ago
          It presents a 48bit address space for services, which is ultimately what everyone care about. Having the "service location" protocol be part of the transport OSI Layer in TCP was a design flaw IMO. That should have been handled higher in the stack.
• rmoriz 5y ago
  Still waiting for Hetzner to support announcing provider independent (PI) IPv4/IPv6 subnets like vultr does for ages.
• JepZ 5y ago
  4 years ago, I assumed, that by 2021 we would have about 50% IPv6 adoption: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14855347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14855347 Now it looks like I was wrong and we got just about 33% and the curve seems to flatten already: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#20 https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#20
  • gowthamgts12 5y ago
    is it because of NAT adoption everywhere? related: major indian telcos like Jio and Airtel are rolling out CGNAT.
    • maccolgan 5y ago
      Jio has spearheaded IPv6 too, but OTOH Airtel hasn't but is still slowly rolling it out
• NmAmDa 5y ago
  Hetzner also raises the price of entry level VPSs to cover the cost of giving a new IPv4 address for each machine.
• chillydawg 5y ago
  This worked. I had an idle /29 and gave it up to them instead of paying.
• WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
  And here we have it, a new currency…
• edub 5y ago
  I've done no work to diagnose where the failure is, but I have Google Fiber, with the supplied Google Wifi device, am on my Google Pixelbook running Google's Chrome OS, and I cannot access Google via IPv6. I don't think I could have a more streamlined setup where Google has full control from end to end to make IPv6 a reality. I can find blog posts by Google talking about the importance of IPv6 adoption, and yet I can't access ipv6.google.com.
• hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  Whenever I see articles like this (and there have been tons over the past decade), I can never stop thinking about how poorly designed IPv6 was for adoption. Tons of other people have commented on this, but if we simply extended the IPv4 address space, instead of having a parallel space with IPv6, the transition would have gone much more smoothly IMO.
  • sedatk 5y ago
    I agree that IPv6 roll-out strategy has been broken from the beginning but how does "extending the space" help here? You still need to add support to the new space in all relevant layers. What does the extension strategy change here?
  • icedchai 5y ago
    How would that even work? The IPv4 address fields are 32-bits. If you extend them, you have a new protocol, just like IPv6. There could've been some parallel efforts (like opening up the 240/4 former class-E space for assignment), but that would just be a short term patch. IPv6 has been available for over 20 years. This is way longer than IPv4 was available when the Internet went "mainstream" in the mid-90's. ISPs need to get their ass in gear.
    • hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
      This post is an "oldie but goodie", I think it's been around probably at least 20 years, and the section titled "The IPv6 mess, part one: incompatibility" explains what I'm talking about. https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      • icedchai 5y ago
        I've seen it. Unfortunately, he doesn't provide a real solution. The fact that some newer ISPs (like Verizon FIOS) are still not offering IPv6 in some areas is embarrassing.
• stjohnswarts 5y ago
  So have the problems with IPV6 leaking information (mostly IPs I think) when using a VPN been fixed yet? DNS leaks and such used to be a problem.
  • namibj 5y ago
    Well, don't let whatever application you run access arbitrary networking of any kind. Like, literally hide the LAN adapter from it. Then add a virtual adapter for/from the VPN software. This worked from the beginning on for IPv4 and IPv6 (probably also more exotic networking protocols) on Linux, though I don't know how hacky the Windows equivalent to this is.
• Thorentis 5y ago
  IPv6 adoption is sadly a chicken or egg problem. Most residential ISPs near me provide IPv6 along with IpV4. But since so many of the internet still doesn't work with IPv6, and because ISPs have run out of IpV4 addresses to assign, they have started using CGNAT to assign a single public IpV4 to multiple customers. This means you can't self host servers of any kind which sucks. Some ISPs don't use CGNAT, and have therefore become popular with gamers, tech people, and so on. But I imagine this will change eventually. Hopefully if enough tech people start hating CGNAT and wish that the internet just worked with IPV6, they will push adoption elsewhere (as most people just won't care).
  • rodgerd 5y ago
    Yeah, my ISP does an IPv4 (static is an extra cost) and a full IPv6 /56 assignment. Beyond that, though, I think a lot of the fundamentalism around "IPv6 should mean everything is always available, if you don't like that get gud at network security" has been incredibly counter-productive. IPv4 NAT has given a certain level of network security to consumers, and IPv6 defaulting to always-on, all-the-time is not a comforting story.
    • kstrauser 5y ago
      But the same class of device that currently provides NAT to the end user could just as easily provide a default-deny firewall. It's not as though it's easier for Netgear to implement NAT than a basic firewall.
  • rstuart4133 5y ago
    Well, I remember reading a blog post from someone who analysed IPv4 address pricing, and concluded it was increasing quadratically (ah, here it is https://www.retevia.net/address-pricing-2019-and-beyond/ https://www.retevia.net/address-pricing-2019-and-beyond/). The noise is so high it seemed such certainty seems a little out of place, but clearly it is going up and it's growth rate is at least linear and much bigger than inflation. Given that's true, what happens next is not so hard to predict. The price will continue to go up for a while, but then it will hit an inflection point. It's an inflection point because what makes IPv4 attractive is better connectivity. Network effects in other words. But once the real migration starts, connectivity will swing in towards IPv6, so an IPv4 address will be worth less than an IPv6 address. Which is to say it will be worth nothing. That translates into a rapid rise in price presumably artificially inflated by speculation, then the bubble will pop, the bull will turn into a bear, and the price will drop off a cliff. In other words, you will know the transition to IPv6 has happened when you see that price crash.
• andrewmcwatters 5y ago
  I am curious, as there's a lot of mature software out there that will never be updated to make the jump to IPv6; is there a way to emulate IPv4 traffic over IPv6 to support old software? I mean, I guess there is with 4in6 and Tunnel Setup Protocol? But I've not seen it done yet in the real world. I think maybe if some quirky software developer wrote something popular that only worked over IPv6, maybe we'd see a slight uptick.
• c3534l 5y ago
  There's a cost to switching to IPv6 and a cost to buying IPv4 addresses. When the cost to buying IPv4 addresses exceeds the cost of switching, people will switch. In my humble opinion, there is no problem - we just underestimate how much change costs.
• riffic 5y ago
  > Dedicated IPv4 addresses (for SSL encryption) lol. SNI exists folks.
• cnst 5y ago
  Still cheaper than AWS! * AWS in July 2021: 0.005 USD/hour = 3.65 USD/month. * Hetzner in July 2021: 0.84 EUR/month = 1.00 USD/month. * Hetzner from January 2022: 1.70 EUR/month = 2.02 USD/month. With a 19 EUR = 22.58 USD setup fee at Hetzner since August 2021: x * 1.00 + 22.58 = x * 3.65; 22.58 = x * (3.65 - 1.00) x = 22.58 / (3.65 - 1.00) = 22.58 / 2.65 = 8.52 months to recoup the setup fee compared to AWS. With the Jan 2022 monthly price increase: x * 2.02 + 22.58 = x * 3.65; 22.58 = x * (3.65 - 2.02) x = 22.58 / (3.65 - 2.02) = 22.58 / 1.63 = 13.85 months to recoup the setup fee compared to AWS. It's interesting that the 19 EUR per IPv4 setup fee applies to both single IP addresses, as well as full subnets -- /24 now has a whopping 4864 EUR setup fee! (19*256=4864) Ouch!
• johnklos 5y ago
  "/29 Subnet (5 usable IPs)" When will these dumb large companies stop wasting TWO addresses per subnet?
  • nacs 5y ago
    I believe they assign 1 as a gateway address and the other as an IPMI address.