The cost of egress traffic is a
very good reason for many organizations to not fully migrate to a cloud provider anytime soon. And since, unlike with storage costs, there doesn't seem to be an actual
reason (other than: it makes migrating to competitors cost-prohibitive in a subset of cases), that seems kind of... weird?
Small example: an actual company I do some work for is in the business of delivering creative assets to distributors. This results in an egress of around 180TB per month, which is, on average just, around 500Mb/s.
So, this company currently operates 2 racks in commercial data centers, linked via 10Gb/s Ethernet-over-DWDM, with 2x512Mb/s and 1x1Gb/s Internet uplinks per DC. Each rack has 2 generic-OEM servers with ~64 AMD Zen cores, 1/2TB RAM, ~8TB NVMe and ~100TB SAS RAID6 storage per node.
Just the cost-savings over egress on AWS is enough to justify that setup, including the cost of an engineer to keep it all up and running (even though the effort required for that turns out to be minimal).
So, are cloud providers ignoring a significant market here, or is the markup on their current customers lucrative enough?
Small example: an actual company I do some work for is in the business of delivering creative assets to distributors. This results in an egress of around 180TB per month, which is, on average just, around 500Mb/s.
So, this company currently operates 2 racks in commercial data centers, linked via 10Gb/s Ethernet-over-DWDM, with 2x512Mb/s and 1x1Gb/s Internet uplinks per DC. Each rack has 2 generic-OEM servers with ~64 AMD Zen cores, 1/2TB RAM, ~8TB NVMe and ~100TB SAS RAID6 storage per node.
Just the cost-savings over egress on AWS is enough to justify that setup, including the cost of an engineer to keep it all up and running (even though the effort required for that turns out to be minimal).
So, are cloud providers ignoring a significant market here, or is the markup on their current customers lucrative enough?