Revised edits for the new egress-ip (app scoped) feature #2326
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
PeterCxy
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
networking/egress-ips.html.md
Outdated
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| ## Static Egress IPs (App-Scoped) | ||
| ## Static Egress IPs (App-Scoped) (Beta) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
They're not beta anymore. The reason why docs were updated today is exactly because they are no longer considered beta. The flyctl side will be updated shortly to reflect that. Billing for static egress IPs start on Jan 1, 2026 (I don't think that's necessary to mention in docs, I will be writing a short FP to remind users of that)
PeterCxy
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
networking/egress-ips.html.md
Outdated
| - When using App-scoped static egress IPs, a Machine can make up to 1000 connections to _each_ external IP address. There is no limit on the _total_ number of concurrent connections. | ||
| - We do not expect this to be a concern for most apps. However, feel free to talk to us if this limits your use case! | ||
| - When using app-scoped static egress IPs, a Machine can make up to 1024 concurrent connections to _each_ destination IP address. There is no limit on the _total_ number of concurrent connections. | ||
| - We do not expect this to be a concern for most apps. However, feel free to talk to us if this limits your use case! |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should have one more level of indentation?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll actually just use a small warning callout for this instead of the extra indentation
PeterCxy
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
networking/egress-ips.html.md
Outdated
| - We do not expect this to be a concern for most apps. However, feel free to talk to us if this limits your use case! | ||
| - When you have multiple static egress IPs assigned in one region, there is currently no way to specify exactly which IP each machine will use. | ||
| - When new machines are created, there might be a brief window when an app-scoped egress IP is not applied to the machine. This may happen more often with more machines or during bluegreen deployment. Allocating multiple pairs of static egress IPs alleviates the issue. | ||
| - There may be a short delay between allocating an egress IP (or creating a Machine) and the egress IP becoming usable. This is inherent to how the system applies IPs to new Machines. This delay may be more noticeable with more Machines or during bluegreen deployments. Allocating multiple pairs of static egress IPs alleviates the issue. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this description is entirely accurate. It's essentially talking about two possible scenarios:
- Right after allocating a new egress IP, in that case the egress IP will be applied to all existing machines after a short delay. Allocating multiple pairs will probably not help in this case (since allocating them might be slower 😄 ).
- The app already has an egress IP assigned, and a new machine is created. In that case there might be a delay before the machine gets to use the egress IP, and only in this case might allocating multiple pairs help.
PeterCxy
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
networking/egress-ips.html.md
Outdated
| If a Machine has a machine-scoped egress IP, it takes precedence over any app-scoped egress IP in the same region. This behavior may change in the future. | ||
|
|
||
| <div class="warning icon"> | ||
| When migrating from machine-scoped to app-scoped egress IPs, release machine-scoped IPs first to make sure that Machines use the app-scoped IPs. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not necessary, you may release machine-scoped IPs after app-scoped egress IPs are assigned to ensure a smooth transition.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary of changes
Why- The live doc treated app-scoped egress IPs as GA, but they're in beta. This should help set the proper expectations about stability and potential behavior changes that customers might experience.
fly ips release-egressand persist across Machine destruction.Why- The live doc implied persistence but didn't state release behavior, which can cause billing confusion and leaked IPs.
Why: The live doc showed final pricing, but the feature is in beta and currently free. This prevents billing any surprises.
Why: During migration, machines can silently use machine-scoped IPs instead of app-scoped ones, causing unexpected routing. Want to make sure users are aware of this.