News: 1690810387

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

AWS: IPv4 addresses cost too much, so you’re going to pay

(2023/07/31)


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.

It is now four years since we [1]officially ran out of IPv4 ranges to allocate, and since then, those wanting a new public IPv4 address have had to rely on address ranges being recovered, either from from organizations that close down or those that return addresses they no longer require as they migrate to IPv6.

If Amazon's cloud division is to be believed, the difficulty in obtaining public IPv4 addresses has seen the cost of acquiring a single address rise by more than 300 percent over the past five years, and as we all know, the business is [2]a little short of cash at the moment , so is having to pass these costs on to users.

[3]

"This change reflects our own costs and is also intended to encourage you to be a bit more frugal with your use of public IPv4 addresses and to think about accelerating your adoption of IPv6 as a modernization and conservation measure," writes AWS Chief Evangelist Jeff Barr, on the company [4]news blog .

[5]

[6]

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 apparently apply whether the address is attached to a service or not, and like many AWS charges, appear inconsequential at first glance but can mount up over time if a customer is using many of them.

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.

[7]

However, customers will not be charged for IP addresses that they own and bring to AWS using Amazon's BYOIP feature. AWS offers a free tier for EC2, and this will include 750 hours of public IPv4 address usage per month for the first 12 months, starting from the same date the charges do.

To try and help customers get a handle on how this might affect their AWS bill, the company said it is adding information on public IPv4 addresses to the AWS Cost and Usage Report (CUR). It also unveiled a new feature of Amazon VPC IP Address Management (IPAM) called [8]Public IP Insights , which is intended to simplify analysis and auditing of public IPv4 addresses.

10 years later

It is now more than a decade since IPv6 was [9]officially launched , but adoption has been slow and gradual as many organizations saw little need to change at first, especially when managing a migration from the older standard to the new one was likely to be complex.

Although the world officially ran out of unallocated IPv4 addresses in 2019, according to the European regional Internet registry RIPE, it [10]posted figures last year showing that the IPv4 routing table still has six times as many entries as that for IPv6.

However, this apparent disparity may be slightly misleading, it claimed, as internet registries have taken advantage of the massive 128-bit address space of IPv6 to ensure that "organizations receive blocks that are, in many cases, large enough to cover all their future addressing needs" when allocating new address ranges, whereas IPv4 saw ever smaller allocation sizes as the address space filled up.

[11]IPv6 for Dummies: NSA pushes security manual on DoD admins

[12]Reverse DNS queries may reveal too much, computer scientists argue

[13]Microsoft to kill off old access rules in Exchange Online

[14]OVHcloud opens up Bring Your Own IP service for IPv4 failover

"Even once all networks have deployed and announced IPv6, we can expect the routing table to be smaller than that for IPv4," RIPE claimed.

RIPE also quoted IPv6 adoption by end users last year, as estimated by Google and APNIC, the regional internet address registry for the Asia-Pacific region, as being between 30 percent and 40 percent.

[15]

But as The Register wrote back when IPv4 addresses officially ran out, it is going to be with us for a good few years yet. RIPE was predicting then that it might take "five to 10 years" before the world starts to truly abandon the IPv4 address space. Four years of that have already passed, and IPv4 still seems to be going as strong as ever. ®

Get our [16]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.theregister.com/2019/11/25/ipv4_addresses_gone/

[2] https://www.theregister.com/2023/04/28/cloud_slowdown_hits_amazon_as/

[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZMfap2aVQCMDVQoSxcd9TgAAA9g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[4] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address-charge-public-ip-insights/

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZMfap2aVQCMDVQoSxcd9TgAAA9g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZMfap2aVQCMDVQoSxcd9TgAAA9g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZMfap2aVQCMDVQoSxcd9TgAAA9g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[8] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/ipam/view-public-ip-insights.html

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2012/06/05/ipv6_launch_day/

[10] https://labs.ripe.net/author/wilhelm/ipv6-10-years-out-an-analysis-in-users-tables-and-traffic/

[11] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/25/nsa_ipv6_guidelines/

[12] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/29/reverse_dns_queries_reveal_too/

[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/28/microsoft_exchange_online_cars/

[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/07/ovhcloud_ipv4/

[15] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZMfap2aVQCMDVQoSxcd9TgAAA9g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[16] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/



Doctor Syntax

"Chief Evangelist Jeff Barr"

Surely a Chief Evangelist should be called Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.

IPv6-mostly?

Crypto Monad

There's a [1]nice write-up from RIPE about what happens if you run an "IPv6-mostly" network.

TL;DR: with modern Android/iOS/macOS devices it works quite well. If this level of interoperability had been specified 25 years ago, maybe we'd all be using IPv6 instead of RFC1918 behind our routers.

Unfortunately, since the vast majority of Internet content is still only on IPv4, you still need a NAT64 in your network. That's the fundamental problem: it means everyone still *needs* an IPv4 address, whether or not they use IPv6. But once you have an IPv4 address, there's little incentive to deploy IPv6, since everything of significance is already reachable via IPv4 (bar a few cat-feeders and Loops Of Zen)

[1] https://labs.ripe.net/author/ondrej_caletka_1/deploying-ipv6-mostly-access-networks/

Re: IPv6-mostly?

EvaQ

"TL;DR: with modern Android/iOS/macOS devices it works quite well. " ... it could work well ... indeed with NAT64 and DNS-conversion etc ... provided by your mobile operator ... which is work for the mobile operator.

Which is doable, but it can be easier for mobile operator to put you behind CGNAT ... which do they. So, everybody, check it now: on your Android, turn off Wifi (so that you're only connected to mobile), and find your IP-address in your Android -> Settings. Mine is 10.149.142.255. So non-public, so my phone is behind NAT of my mobile operator. Easy for them.

Now with wifi back on: RFC1918 LAN address, plus ... IPv6 by my fixed ISP.

Re: IPv6-mostly?

Crypto Monad

Whether it's NAT44 or NAT64, it still requires CGN to reach the majority of the Internet.

NAT44 means they have to give your device both an IPv4 and an IPv6 address. With NAT64, they only have to give your device an IPv6 address.

By the way, you don't need DNS64 any more, if your device has an embedded CLAT - which is true for iOS and Android, and macOS if you send it the appropriate signals via DHCP and RA options. In fact, you can even open a page by IP address like https://1.1.1.1/ and it works fine over a pure IPv6 connection. The CLAT embeds the IPv4 address inside an IPv6 prefix used by your NAT64 device.

Re: IPv6-mostly?

EvaQ

"NAT44 means they have to give your device both an IPv4 and an IPv6 address." ... why?

My mobile operator has my phone on an RFC1918 address, so behind NAT (NAT44). But I have no IPv6 address from them. And yes, I cannot reach ipv6.google.com.

If operators were obliged to give IPv6 to customers (hello government!), the NAT64 could be become interesting. Until then: IPv6 is so scary!

Re: IPv6-mostly?

GruntyMcPugh

I work in local Govt, and we are still IPv4. I have a friend who designs networks, and every now and again I ask him if he's deployed any IPv6 and it's been a 'no' so far. Checking a couple of academic institutions I've worked at, one still appears to be on the same class B as when they were allocated back in the day.

Re: IPv6-mostly?

Anonymous Coward

Just because acadmeic institutions are running IPv4 doesn't mean they're not also running IPv6.

We're involved in some international collaboration work and part of the requirements is that we have to support IPv6. (And that's not "Oh, wouldn't it be nice", it's a "You need IPv6 for this to work due to the number of endpoints involved.")

Re: IPv6-mostly?

EvaQ

Here in the Netherlands, as of 31 december 2021, IPv6 is compulsory for government websites and mailservers. See https://www.logius.nl/actueel/vanaf-31-december-moeten-websites-en-e-mails-van-overheidsinstellingen-bereikbaar-zijn-ipv6

So I checked my local government's website ... yup, IPv6 enabled.

Note: that does not mean they must use IPv6 on their LANs. But it is a first nice step.

Wait ... there is more

EvaQ

"those wanting a new public IPv4 address have had to rely on address ranges being recovered, either from from organizations that close down or those that return addresses they no longer require as they migrate to IPv6."

There's another source: existing ISP's that move most of their consumer customers to CGNAT and sell a part of their IPv4 addresses. And, this will be cursing in the church, CGNAT works quite nicely for regular customers like your neighbour and your sister. Not for us techy people, of course!

More cursing in the church: giving IPv6 to customers does not take away the need for their IPv4 connectivity: more than half of the webservers don't do IPv6 at all. We'll need dual stack for the next decade(s). With plain IPv4, or CGNAT-IPv4. And yes, I know there is IPv4-over-IPv6 etc ... but good luck introducing that to your 100.000+ customers and their installed base of routers.

Without comment

Arthur the cat

arthur@arthur[5]▶ host -t aaaa theregister.com

theregister.com has no AAAA record

arthur@arthur[5]▶ host -t aaaa www.theregister.com

www.theregister.com has no AAAA record

arthur@arthur[5]▶ host -t aaaa forums.theregister.com

forums.theregister.com has no AAAA record

[Well, someone has to do it.]

Re: Without comment

EvaQ

$ host www.theregister.com

www.theregister.com has address 104.18.5.22

www.theregister.com has address 104.18.4.22

And 104.18.5.22 is cloudflare, which offers IPv6, so I wonder why theregister has turned that off? Why, why, oh why? Turning it on for www.theregister.com should not be complicated. For forums.theregister.com there might be things with anti-spamming.

Re: Without comment

MatthewSt

Interestingly, I'm pretty sure El Reg went through a brief phase of being fronted by Cloudflare which did enable IPv6. Easy come easy go

Edit: Beaten to it by EvaQ

"IPv6-only" VPS

EvaQ

I saw an advertisement for "IPv6-only" VPS for cheap. I was very interested how that was working, so I ordered such a VPS ... and I was disappointed: IPv6 working, but IPv4 too ... behind NAT. So IPv4 after all.

The AWS announcement "pay for public IPv4 address" is therefore more correct: Still IPv4 connectivy to the outside world, via NAT. And pay a little something if you want to be reachable via IPv4 / public IPv4 address

TrevorH

$0.005/h is US$44 a year so not going to break the bank for most people who need one. People that use hundreds of them, not so much.

Gene Cash

Yeah, well, nickle-and-dimeing you to death is how cloud makes money, after all.

Couldn't they just use names instead /s

t245t

“ Cloud giant AWS will start charging customers for public IPv4 addresses from next year ”

As one executive of a major corporation once put it: Couldn't they just use names instead /s

Why use Windows, since there is a door?