undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmark2422y ago0 comments

Addresses were already being charged if they weren't attached to an interface. Increase that charge if you're looking to churn unused IP addresses.

0 comments

jeremyjh2y ago

That would not catch every public IP address that is actually unused, because it can be attached to an interface and yet not be needed or actually used by any client. But I don't agree with GP that this is an important reason for the price increase. They are increasing prices simply because costs have increased.

mark242OP2y ago

Anything that an IP address can be attached to is already accumulating a charge, just by existing and running. EC2, NAT gateway, ELB, etc. What's "actually unused" then? Minimum amount of traffic? I don't think it's in Amazon's purview to make those judgement calls.

jeremyjh2y ago

What I meant by unused is that there might not be a client that ever connects to that IP address, so the public IP address itself might not be used even if its attached to a resource.

> I don't think it's in Amazon's purview to make those judgement calls.

I already said I don't agree with GP that this is a motive for Amazon.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

jeremyjh2y ago

mark242OP2y ago

jeremyjh2y ago

What I meant by unused is that there might not be a client that ever connects to that IP address, so the public IP address itself might not be used even if its attached to a resource.

> I don't think it's in Amazon's purview to make those judgement calls.

I already said I don't agree with GP that this is a motive for Amazon.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse