Why is LFS access from Actions billed?


We are using a repo with LFS to side-load assets into the CI build (pre-built binaries for 3rd-party-libraries), as none of the existing formats in Github Packages fits our build system (cross-platform C++ project with CMake).


LFS accesses from Github Actions are consuming bandwidth quota. From what I understand, the general stance on Actions, is that for stuff hosted by Github, access from Actions should be generally free of charge.

We didn’t want to store it in a flat repository without LFS, but it looks like that’s for now the only way to avoid being billed for internal traffic?

@Ext3h ,

Is your repository public or private? And is your package public or private?

According to the introduction from the docs:

The usages for private repositories and private packages are not free. Once you reach the spending limit, you need to be billed to increase the spending limit for private repositories or private packages.

It’s a public repository, and access is from Actions in another public repository (albeit without access token, if that makes any difference).

It’s not Packages I’m talking about (where the exemption from internal bandwidth billing appears to work), but LFS where internal traffic appears to be billed. It’s neither minutes nor storage which are problematic, but only traffic.

@Ext3h ,

I noticed the following description in the docs about LFS billing:

Every account using Git Large File Storage receives 1 GB of free storage and 1 GB a month of free bandwidth. If the bandwidth and storage quotas are not enough, you can choose to purchase an additional quota for Git LFS. Unused bandwidth doesn’t roll over month-to-month.

Looks like, there is a spending limit for the bandwidth for every account. More details, see “About billing for Git Large File Storage”.

Yes, thank you for stating the obvious.

And now to the original question, why is internal traffic counted against that quota?

@Ext3h ,

why is internal traffic counted against that quota?

About this question, I recommend that you can directly report it here. That will allow you to directly interact with the appropriate engineering team.