151

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
[-] drwho@beehaw.org 57 points 1 year ago

I'm going on professional year 24 of clients requiring that IPv6 be deactivated on every device in their network. Whee.

[-] negativenull@negativenull.com 41 points 1 year ago

My current ISP still does not offer IPv6 🤦 🤦 🤦

[-] housepanther@lemmy.goblackcat.com 15 points 1 year ago

Verizon, my ISP, offers IPv6 in my area but the implementation is broken and it ends up being an order of magnitude slower than simply using IPv4 and HE as an IPv6 tunnel broker.

[-] tychosmoose@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

AT&T is the same. And the last time I looked they don't give you enough address space to host your own subnet. You get a /64 instead of a /56. And it's slower than ipv4.

Every few months I try it out, complain and then switch it off.

The same goes for my place of work. It's going to be shit loads of fun when we are forcibly transitioned. I hope before that time I will be doing web development work and kissing my professional career in infrastructure good bye.

[-] boonhet@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

What's their rationale? Is there one?

[-] dan@upvote.au 8 points 1 year ago

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

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

[-] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 year ago

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

We were talking about it when I was in undergrad.

[-] grue@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

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

"Compliance with regulations."

[-] r00ty@kbin.life 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah, my company totally blocks ipv6 when the VPN is on. Not sure why they're so backward for a tech company.

[-] QuinceDaPence@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Is there really any problem with that on the internal though?

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

Technology

37739 readers
601 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