Cloud NAT would be fine except it costs 4.5¢ per GB (in both directions) which could hurt some use cases. If your backend VMs pull in more than 64.8 GB per month from the Internet it's cheaper to just pay for the public IP. (Only applies to outbound connections initiated by the VM, inbound connections through load balancers don't go through the NAT.)
I'll echo what others have said - it sucks that they're doing this before adding IPv6 support. A good portion of traffic could bypass the NAT entirely considering how many services support IPv6 these days.
They don't start charging until April, so maybe they'll surprise us with an IPv6 announcement before then, but I'm not betting on it. :(
I'll echo what others have said - it sucks that they're doing this before adding IPv6 support. A good portion of traffic could bypass the NAT entirely considering how many services support IPv6 these days.
They don't start charging until April, so maybe they'll surprise us with an IPv6 announcement before then, but I'm not betting on it. :(