Live data from Hacker News

Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

ciphercue.com

51–60 of 352 posts

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have Cloudflare Tunnels which is almost too good to pass up. I don't particularly understand how CF makes money on it, with the many high traffic sites I have used that I know don't pay CF a dime. Tunnels adds so much more overhead in compute on both ends more than their normal CDN/proxy would.

big corps = big money. they dont make money from your $5/mth static site, its practically free when you're at CF scale

What I was talking about: https://newtrackon.com/

10+ BT trackers using CF likely free tier. Low-end EACH 300-500 MILLION HTTP requests/24hr uncached, some exceed a billion reqs/day (using statistics from other open trackers) 20TB-40TB daily, ~1-3 Gbps sustained.

That's a crap load of transfer and compute to process those tiny network connections. As someone that's run a Tunnel on a normal site in the millions, the daemon uses a sizeable amount of CPU and I can't see any reason why it's not the same on the other end.

Whatever source CF has going on, kudos to them and their engineering team.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#52
In the late 90s and early 2000s the NSA and other US intelligence agencies underwent massive efforts to basically privatize the gathering of intelligence. Its a lot easier to fund your "total information awarness" initiatives via public markets and private investors than to ask congress for money to do so. So they did just that.

"In 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contacted Unspam Technologies, asking, "Do you have any idea how valuable the data you have is?" The DHS' email served as the impetus for Cloudflare, a technology company Prince co-founded with Holloway and fellow Harvard Business School graduate Michelle Zatlyn the following year."

--Matthew Prince's Wikipedia page.

Dont for a second think cloudflare's generous free tier offerings are out of the goodness of their heart. They're a giant fkin MiTM project for the US governemnt. And of course, cloudflare isn't the only one.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#53

[flagged]

How did you extrapolate that leap of logic? Maybe we suck at business.

We have stagnant economies with slow adopters and shallow capital markets. EU tech companies are working with hands tied behind their backs.

The US deserves it's success.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> now you can get by on a $200 a month plan for a small business You're delusional if you think that $200/month is appropriate for a small business to pay to host a website ... Most websites don't need a CDN nor DDOS protection, you need to configure your webserver to rate limit stuff that suck bandwidth/CPU from you, but besides that, you've basically fallen for the marketing from Cloudflare that everything requires…

> you need to configure your webserver to rate limit stuff that suck bandwidth/CPU from you This works for cases where the traffic takes too long to process. Once you get 3gbit traffic on your 1gbit link, you can't do anything yourself - the only thing that can save you is a bigger pipe.

> Once you get 3gbit traffic on your 1gbit link, you can't do anything yourself - the only thing that can save you is a bigger pipe.

Realistically, out of the DDoS we typically see, how many are in fact "they had bigger pipes than you"? I've come across that once in my ~3 decade career maintaining infrastructure for websites, some quite popular. Most of the time the attacks are relatively low-effort and easy to stave away, there been one time when the attacker seemed to have basically endless amount of resources, and yes, that time we ended up with emergency calls to Akamai.

But again, those sort of attacks seem to happen seldom, and I don't think people should default to trying to prevent them. Deal with that once you get there, because most websites and services never get there in the first.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#55
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> now you can get by on a $200 a month plan for a small business You're delusional if you think that $200/month is appropriate for a small business to pay to host a website ... Most websites don't need a CDN nor DDOS protection, you need to configure your webserver to rate limit stuff that suck bandwidth/CPU from you, but besides that, you've basically fallen for the marketing from Cloudflare that everything requires…

What you're paying for is business continuity, not for them to host your site. I know you can host the site itself on much cheaper infrastructure.

If your site is static you can host it on CF pages for free with unlimited* egress.

* of course it's not unlimited unlimited but I've not heard of anyone being cut off.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#58
It's seriously good value for small websites. Basically, there is no cost aside from the domain. And for registering and managing domains, they are pretty much the most affordable option as well. And they have a few other things that aren't half bad to use with pretty generous freemium layers.

We used Google's CDN for the last six years or so but it's pretty annoying to deal with and you have to pay for a load balancer every month in order to properly use it. That adds up to quite a bit per year. Even if all you are doing is routing domains to some bucket with a website.

We migrated most of our gcloud stuff to Hetzner beginning of the year. That left a load balancer and a few static websites hosted in Google buckets. I migrated all of that to Cloudflare just a few months ago.

I still have a few buckets in gcloud proxied via a vm in hetzner with a proxied domain in Cloudflare. Not the most elegant route but it works. I might optimize some of that later. At this point, we pay for some Google buckets and not much else in gcloud.

Honestly, Google and AWS need to start paying attention to Cloudflare more. Their complexity is chasing people towards Cloudflare. The hoops you have to jump through with both of them to host a simple website with their CDNs is embarrassing. I've gone through the process with both of them. Although my experience with Route53 is a bit stale at this point. On Cloudflare, getting an new website up and running with a freshly registered domain takes only a few minutes.

Re: Among European Companies That Use a CDN, Nearly 9 in 10 Use Cloudflare

#60
post #10

Naive question: How important is it to use a CDN in the first place? Why can't you just serve the content yourself?

Because an average request would have to travel half the globe, so setting up a simple HTTPS connection would already take a second. That's completely unacceptable for static content. Not only would transfer be slow, they would also be much more pressing on the network as the request would occupy huge stretches and many interconnects and switches. Furthermore, it hardens the website against DDoS and adds robustness f…

Minority of sites have global traffic. This is especially true for non-English sites.

So, while average request may have to travel quarter (not half) of the Internet globe, median request from the set of requests that matter has much lower latency.

Barcelona to Stockholm is about 65ms, ~35ms to Amsterdam, ~43ms to Frankfurt.

HTTP/3 is ubiquitous, you don’t get TCP handshake penalty anymore in major browsers.

Post reply on HN