[rewmie]

> I've lost track of all of the "Private Endpoints", "Private Links", "Service Endpoints", "Private Resolvers" and "Virtual WAN" products they've introduced... all to make IPv4 work at scale.

I'm not sure what you've been reading, but the concept of a private link has absolutely nothing to do with IPv4 vs IPv6. In fact, practically all your remarks don't involve the issue at all.

The most charitable interpretation of your comment is that you're making the mistake of conflating any application involving a virtual network as something caused or involing IPv4.

[jiggawatts]

I replied to someone else's similar misconception of what problem Private Link solves here: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=37609614

Hint: it's a complex workaround for insufficient IPv4 addresses.

[rewmie]

I think your comment shows a high dose of ignorance and complete lack of research on the topic. The whole point of private link is to not route traffic over the internet, and instead flow traffic between private networks through private pipes.

One of the primary usecases and design requirements for this service is regulatory compliance. They say right on the tin that the service is designed to send traffic over private networks, including AWS's own global network. The whole point of private link is to ship data through the pipes you own, instead of routing it through the wild. I don't know how you could have missed that.

More importantly, you really need to want to use private link connections. This is a value-added service. You need to want to go out of your way to avoid your traffic to go through the internet to onboard both ends of your services to private link.

Not only are your conspiratorial hypothesis completely out of base, even your baseless assumptions have absolutely no relation with what version of the IP protocol is in place.

I'm the first to join in on any good old fashioned AWS/big cloud provider bashing, but these should be grounded on reality.

[jiggawatts]

If you think that either Azure or AWS loop terabits of customer traffic between two of their own services "out to the Internet" and back just because the IPv4 octets don't start with a "10", then you're the one who's missing the big picture.

[icedchai]

Yep. Pick your poison. You're either nickle-and-dimed for a "NAT gateway" or overpaying for "VPC endpoints". Often, it's both. I preferred the EC2-classic days, honestly.

[NovemberWhiskey]

I am at a total loss to understand the link between this post and the prior one - can you explain?

[JackSlateur]

Private link is a clever way to implement real network segmentation

That is, when you have a customer in some network and a provider in another network, you had to implement full connectivity between the customer and the provider

With private link, you can remove all that connectivity, and instead expose the provider' service to the customer The service, nothing more, so just one endpoint

This is really good from a security point of view, but also for managing your stuff (especially if there are multiple teams in the compagny): because you now have a resource, you can easily list the services you expose to other people, and whom are your customers

[cduzz]

The IPv6 version of this would be ...

1. get list of customer netblocks

2. setup "internal" service(s) for customers

3. setup firewall rules to allow customer <-> service allow list

4. setup DNS records

5. tell customers DNS and API targets

[JackSlateur]

There is no "ipv6 version of this", private links have no business with layer 3 stuff