• @barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Any CDN worth its salt can run on your domain so that’s not an issue. The issue is that no third-party anything is pointless as links will just change from nyt.adnetwork.com to adnetwork.nyt.com. I’d rather not encourage those kinds of DNS shenanigans.

    • @LufyCZ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      What about a CDN for JS libraries?

      What about YouTube embeds?

      What about images from Imgur?

      Why should all of this be handled by me, on my domain?

      • @barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You’d tell cloudflare DNS “yo put your stuff on cloudflare-cdn.mydomain.foo”. Embeds should be iframes, that is, different webpages, imgur could do the same though yes it’s overkill. Another option would imgur offering an automated API that would allow cloudflare DNS to tell it “here’s a key, please get ready to serve on imgur-cdn.mydomain.foo”.

        It can all be handled on your domain without you actually running the backing servers. It’s also insanity.

      • @barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        No. Things being on your domain doesn’t mean that traffic hits your servers.

        • @Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          It doesn’t, but it defeats the purpose of CDN, because your users still hit your domain instead of CDN one and cannot leverage the benefits of distributed caching. Browser cache is bound to a URL, you change one letter and it is invalidated.

          • @barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Why would the URL change?

            It won’t share js libraries and fonts and whatnot cross-site but compared to a single image that should be negligible. At least if you don’t pull in gazillions of superfluous dependencies and don’t even run dead code elimination over them. And anyway that’s more bandwith usage between user and CDN, not user and you.

            Also I already said that it’s insanity. But it would work.

            • @Aux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Because you’re not using a CDN URL everyone else is.

              Savings are massive for the user. If you don’t care about your users, please stop doing anything development related.

              • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                You know what’s faster than a CDN? Vanilla js.

                And how often do I have to repeat that it’s insanity? It’s just that user network traffic doesn’t even come close to the top of reasons why it’s a bad idea.

                  • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    2
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I wasn’t the one advocating to outlaw cross-site everything. I only said that it could be made to work… not well, but still. Also that it’s a bad idea. Do you disagree with that?

                    But yes I’m also insane how could you tell.