6 ms·
wouldn't websites have alternate CDN's managing their traffic, why should they have a single point of failure ? I was assuming there are couple of services lik
by gansai 5y ago
wouldn't websites have alternate CDN's managing their traffic, why should they have a single point of failure ?
I was assuming there are couple of services like Fastly and companies might have architected keeping in mind the alternatives too, I guess.
- raimondious 5y agoNormally you configure your a record to point at the cdn as the cdn is the thing that gives you multiple points of failure (caches all over the world). Hard to have a fallback to that. Running multiple cdns would be extremely expensive. Cdn caches are kept useful by traffic running through them, so hard to have a backup for that too.
- ImpactStrafe 5y agoBecause interacting and switching between cdns can be very complicated and/or costly It should be planned for, especially by major tech organizations like reddit, or Amazon, etc. But I won't fault news organizations, who already don't have boatloads of money for not having fail over cdns