With the huge margins they must have on egress bandwidth, I'm not holding my breath though.
If your data is in S3 or DynamoDB, egress fees will encourage you to process the data within AWS. You’re not going to use BigQuery for that. If you want to add a search index on that, you won’t go shopping around for search products on other clouds, you’ll likely use AWS elasticsearch. That’s where AWS makes money - through this soft lock-in.
They’ll survive and maybe even thrive if they lose the revenue from egress. But who knows what’ll happen if the moat is destroyed? Every AWS service would need to compete on merit with every service on other clouds. They won’t be chosen simply by default.
Euh, 4-80x , the 80x is for EU and the US.
I don't think they have huge margins on egress at all. There needs to be some incentive for customers of cloud services to minimize bandwidth usage. It is a limited resource.
The $/Mbps prices there - about $6k/Tbps in the US - are based in reality and are absolutely reflective of what it costs, hardware, software, redundancy and all - for an effectively 1Tbps pipe.
If you're pricing as $/GB on top of that capacity and keep it reasonably heavily utilized—which can be hard given diurnal demand—the margins only get better! Products like Glacier (S3) exist to fill exactly those gaps.
(Note: currently work at Cloudflare, but wasn't part of this blog and I've been around a bit...)
5Gbps*1 month is ~1.5 PB. AWS is about 0.02/gb or ~30k/1.5pb.
Approximately 30x the cost.
These are old numbers for specific use cases so I'm not sure how much that has changed.
https://aws.amazon.com/shield/pricing/
but regardless, the EGRESS charges are what are absurd. The only logical reason for charging so much for data exiting is to make sure that you can't practically leave the AWS ecosystem.
Just one example is Hetzner, who include 20TB of bandwidth, with anything over that charged at just €1/TB.
Meanwhile, AWS is gouging at €80/TB.
Come on, Amazon is not serving traffic through a Comcast business connection, they're peering directly with other large operators for free or for next to nothing.
- A 42U cabinet - A 15A 120V circuit - An unmetered 1Gbps IP transit link
All at a proper datacenter, namely Hurricane Electric's fmt2 facility. Includes a /29 of IPv4 and a /48 of IPv6, allows me to announce the /24 and /36 I own, and there's a free internet exchange onsite which I have a 1Gbps port at.
You need to provision enough power for simultaneous startup after a power outage, unless you have some really smart PDUs and automation. We have a 10 year old DC with 30A@208V per rack and we have to leave racks half full because modern servers are so power-dense.
In any case, even at your optimistic 250W per rack unit, a full rack of servers with two switches is more than 10kW!
You could possibly run this fictional daemon on your management switch :)
I think this is the most common “enterprise” datacenter server type in 2021, mostly due to licensing constraints from VMware/Microsoft/Red Hat/Oracle/etc. Such servers give the most “bang” per dollar when licensing costs are included.
https://i.imgur.com/Zr5rq4X.png a graph if you're curious :)
They very much have massive margin on egress. Given some of the cost comparisons floated today comparing R2 to S3 egress AWS is likely hitting 1000s of times (likely more) their return on the actual bandwidth cost they pay for month over month.
Usually DoS attack doesn't exhaust the bandwidth, come on..
Remember those ISPs need to make margin, that's why they charge what they do.
AWS _could_ make it's margin on services alone. They just choose not to.