2 ms·

I'm curious, why can't you use an elastic IP?

• supriyo-biswas 3y ago
  This entire thread is about the additional costs imposed on a publicly accessible IP[1]. Granted, there are other (but similarly expensive) workarounds such as NAT gateways[2] for outbound connectivity or the cheaper NAT instance method which AWS doesn't support any more, but there are alternatives[3]. However, for use cases requiring inbound connectivity such as setting up websites on EC2 instances, or using an ELB which need internet access, you need an IPv4 address and these charges definitely rack up. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address-charge-public-ip-insights/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address... [2] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gateway.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gat... [3] https://fck-nat.dev https://fck-nat.dev
  • GabeIsko 3y ago
    Ah, I think i had the connectivity backwards. I thought the complaint was about hosts connecting to these services, not inbound connections to hosts. Ultimately, they will probably want people to solve it with service endpoints, and give preferred pricing on that. But I kind of get why that is a bit wigged out. Because it locks more architecture into them as a vendor. I'm not really sure putting a public ip is a good solution to this, but it is kind of scary because suddenly we are deciding infrastructure decisions more based on how they are being priced. Needs regulation.