You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We should auto-heal our nat instances. Also, we should probably move NAT to it's own module and support gateways and instances interchangeably so we can re-use across our modules.
@osterman NAT Instances are deprecated and do not support NAT64. I am therefore not inclined to add additional support for them. Can we close this, or do you want to pursue it further?
The only reason to create NAT Instances instead of using NAT Gateways is to save money, currently on the order of $20/month. It is not worth the time and effort to further enhance this module's NAT Instance support beyond what is added in #159. Cloud Posse can create a separate NAT Instance module if there is demand for it, but it seems unlikely to me that the expense of supporting NAT Instances would not outweigh the cost savings they bring.
Our recommended cost-saving solution going forward is to use a single NAT Gateway rather than one per region. For a typical installation of 3 regions, that is approximately budget neutral (one NAT Gateway costs about the same as 3 t3.micro NAT instances), costing a total of about US $30/month.
For better NAT instance support, people can use an alternate module such as https://github.com/int128/terraform-aws-nat-instance (we have not vetted it, just noticed it) to create NAT instances and easily connect them to the private subnets.
We should auto-heal our nat instances. Also, we should probably move NAT to it's own module and support gateways and instances interchangeably so we can re-use across our modules.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: