Sure about that? So if I have static images going through an ALB to the requesting client, I can't operate in another way to reduce those costs? ... you're sure?
Sure you can front static assets with the free Cloudflare tier...
[a] which is fine if you're happy with the inflexibility that free Cloudflare offers. And you live in a country where the free tier doesn't have horrible routing (eg use the Sydney AWS region, put Cloudflare in front of it and then watch your traffic to/from Sydney take a round trip via the US or Singapore)
[b] every single AWS service charges egress fees (ie Cloudfront doesn't help at all)
No, but you're not the OP above my comment, so my question still stands.
> (eg use the Sydney AWS region, put Cloudflare in front of it and then watch your traffic to/from Sydney take a round trip via the US or Singapore)
I don't understand? I don't have this issue (I'm in Brisbane; I use ap-southeast-2)
> [c] this does nothing for non-static assets
Non-static assets are going to be very tiny in most cases, and the problem then becomes about volume. If you've got volume and your business model doesn't suck, then you can afford the rate (my understanding is AWS' network egress charges are gross compared to other vendors.)
Nice strawman. I never said you can't operate more efficiently.
Every service on AWS charges egress fees that's my comment. There are other cloud operators that do not. I can safely run some static compute / storage / network at a fixed cost, you can't do this on AWS.
If too many people come to my website it won't wipe out my credit card. The site might go offline but I'd rather take that than a huge bill.
> I can safely run some static compute / storage / network at a fixed cost, you can't do this on AWS.
No provider on the planet gives you truly unlimited, fixed cost networking throughput. None.
AWS provides Lightsail for a fixed cost, static compute, storage, and networking solution. It's a not strawman argument just because you don't understand it.
