New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
How popular NAT VPS is?
HostSailor
Member, Patron Provider
in Providers
NAT VPS has been around for quite some time. As we know, IPv4 addresses will eventually run out one day. Well, we also know we still have abundant IPv4 addresses to use. That’s why virtual servers with their unique IPv4 addresses are still sold at a quite low price nowadays. But virtual servers can become even cheaper without the cost of IP addresses.
Are you interested in a virtual server without its own IPv4 address? We are running this a poll to find out your thoughts. Please pick the one that fits how you feel right now the most, and share what you think as comments below.
Thank you very much for your participation.
NAT VPS
- Do you want to buy a NAT VPS?103 votes
- No, technically it’s difficult to use, for example not easy to use it for web hosting6.80%
- No, current VPS with unique IPv4 address is cheap enough and acceptable22.33%
- No, number of usable ports is limited4.85%
- Yes, possible high-speed download under shared BW at low cost15.53%
- Yes, purely because it’s cheap50.49%
Comments
All providers out there I know offer Openvz-based NAT VPS. I'd love to see KVM NAT VPS (again).
You can't really use nat vps for Production. Because most provider just jam a lot of people, much more than normal vps. I mean why wouldn't they?
And the workaround just isn't worth it the trouble for what? A few bucks?
If it's in SG, more RAM and more than 1 core, then definitely
I don't know why NAT VPS providers offer RAM as low as 128?
If it was something more than 500 MB or 1GB with reasonable amount of SSD and 1 vCore at same price, then that would be best buy instead of IPv4 VPS.
I really don't use all the ports so they are fine to me.
We have been offering free nat vps for free for a while to our users for storing their backup.
Honestly nothing much different once the end user figures out how ip forwarding works. After that, it is a smooth ride.
I primarily use IPv6 (all my employer's internal servers are IPv6-only and my work internet connection, home internet connection and mobile phone all have native IPv6) so I like NAT VPS... No point in paying more for a dedicated IPv4 address. For many of my use cases, it doesn't even need any forwarded ports, as long as there's outgoing IPv4 connectivity of some sort. Many of the locations on my site https://dnstools.ws/ are powered by NAT VPSes and internal communication between the servers is all over IPv6.
HostHongKong (@randvegeta) has KVM NAT VPS in Hong Kong. It's relatively slow compared to other NAT providers I'm using and I've had it lock up a few times, but it's not too bad and seems more stable now.
Me too.. more RAM, cheap price and SG Location..
I can do what I want with ipv6 address. The shared ipv4 is for network connection only. Dockerhub and github is not ipv6 friendly.
Seems like a dumb idea to me - IPv4 is still fairly easy to come by - just look at the IPv4 thread.
If it's cheap enough to justify the fact that there is no ipv4 and there is a setup (reverse proxy or whatever) to enable port 80/443 on the VPS, why not?