For providers like us, we have to lease IPv4. We came long after IPv4 was already depleted. IPv4 prices did go down. Despite that, the $15/year 128MB BuyVM plan is long-gone.

But for a new provider like us, we'd have to spend more than an established player like BuyVM or RackNerd who bought most of their servers pre-AI-boom.

▲

direwolf20 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Have you tried doing ipv6-only plans?

▲

Gigachad 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Vultr has one that's $2.5/month v6 only. Probably good if you just need something tiny to run some automation.

	▲	aitchnyu 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What are the issues faced by v6-only hosts and are there countries where it is a non-issue?

▲

g-mork 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

or just offer v4 HTTPS LB bundled. Never understood why more places didn't do this.

	▲	friendzis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Responsibility and controls. If the host/dc assigns a dedicated addresses the contract can be essentially "the customer assumes all liability behind traffic". With NAT/LB you need at the very least quite robust, evidence-grade monitoring mechanisms tagging all traffic and keeping historical data. In practice, some for of active abuse prevention is required, otherwise huge chunk of your address space is going to effectively linger in blacklist limbo. That is, if being unreachable below "presentation layer" is acceptable in the first place, but I guess the question kind of presupposes this.