My Misadventures with Cloud At Cost
-
@Danp said:
@StrongBad -- So, I can setup a free account on CloudFlare. What the advantage / disadvantage of using CF versus GoDaddy, who is my registrar? I guess by using CF, I can manage the DNS without concern for the registrar, which could change and the DNS would be unaffected, correct?
CloudFare is a CDN, which means if your site goes down, it's cached with them, so the site to the public will appear up, although any new content you published wouldn't be seen until your site went live again.
-
@thanksaj said:
@Danp said:
@StrongBad -- So, I can setup a free account on CloudFlare. What the advantage / disadvantage of using CF versus GoDaddy, who is my registrar? I guess by using CF, I can manage the DNS without concern for the registrar, which could change and the DNS would be unaffected, correct?
CloudFare is a CDN, which means if your site goes down, it's cached with them, so the site to the public will appear up, although any new content you published wouldn't be seen until your site went live again.
Well, that is partially true. CloudFlare is both a DNS host AND a CDN. You can use DNS with or without the CDN. And the CDN can be turned on and off by A or CNAME record. How the CDN behaves can be configured. And new content is normally in seconds. I rarely see a delay even when caching is configured. Like, as fast as I can post and refresh, it is there.
-
@Danp said:
@StrongBad -- So, I can setup a free account on CloudFlare. What the advantage / disadvantage of using CF versus GoDaddy, who is my registrar? I guess by using CF, I can manage the DNS without concern for the registrar, which could change and the DNS would be unaffected, correct?
I always recommend CloudFlare, it's the best DNS host I have found. Your registrar should be ruled out out of hand, your DNS services and your web hosting and/or email hosting and your registrar should always be three discrete services. Doesn't matter who they are, they should never overlap. It's a dangerous loss of critical access if you put them together. Each protects you from the others, unless you make them all one.
-
CloudFlare is the best DNS service that I have used. It's fast and stable, easy interface. And CDN features are included for FREE if you want them!
-
Appreciate all the feedback. From a CloudFare POV, what's the best way to handle multiple TLDs (.com, .net, etc) that resolve to the same website? Do I just add one to CF and then add DNS entries for the others?
-
@Danp no, because that is not how DNS works.
Add each domain to cloudflare as another website.
-
Thanks @JaredBusch!
-
Danp - getting back to your question on what DNS your C@C servers should be using, you can point them toward any DNS servers you want. You'll have to do some performance testing to see which ones offer the best performance for your location.
You could for example use the C@C DNS servers, or you could use Google's 8.8.8.8 and 4.4.4.4.
-
Appreciate all of the input. I now have all of my hosted websites running on my C@C box with CloudFlare handling the DNS. Next step is to shut down my account over at MediaTemple.
Then I've got a ZendTo server that I've been hosting internally that I would like to move to the cloud. Anyone know if I can easily transfer this over to my Centos box? It's currently running on a Ubuntu VM.
-
Likely, but don't know that software specifically. You can get Ubuntu on CloudatCost too if needed.
-
ZendTo seems a bit out of date. They offer packages for Ubuntu 12.04 (several versions old, five in fact.) And CentOS 6, which is a full version behind in the RHEL / CentOS world.
-
@Danp said:
Appreciate all of the input. I now have all of my hosted websites running on my C@C box with CloudFlare handling the DNS. Next step is to shut down my account over at MediaTemple.
Then I've got a ZendTo server that I've been hosting internally that I would like to move to the cloud. Anyone know if I can easily transfer this over to my Centos box? It's currently running on a Ubuntu VM.
Never heard of ZendTo... Looking into it now, looks like it could be something to replace our FTP server...
-
@Danp said:
Appreciate all of the input. I now have all of my hosted websites running on my C@C box with CloudFlare handling the DNS. Next step is to shut down my account over at MediaTemple.
Then I've got a ZendTo server that I've been hosting internally that I would like to move to the cloud. Anyone know if I can easily transfer this over to my Centos box? It's currently running on a Ubuntu VM.
You'd need to reinstall it from the RPM package rather than the Deb. But, the config is likely the same or very similar.
Also may want to check CloudatCosts TOS about file sharing.. not sure their stance on that.
-
All of my sites are currently very light traffic, so I'd like to add the ZendTo site to this same box.
ZendTo works great for our needs. It allows us to securely transfer larger files back and forth with clients.
@thecreativeone91
Thanks... I'll continue to research and maybe touch base with the developer. I can't imagine that our usage of this product would run afoul of C@C's TOS. We just need a secure means of exchange files with clients.
Dan
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Also may want to check CloudatCosts TOS about file sharing.. not sure their stance on that.
What the heck are you talking about? This has nothing to do with C@C. They are not the internet police and there is nothing illegal about file sharing.
If you host illegal shit and the authorities ask your host to shut you down, they will shut it down. But it is not the hosts job, directly. This is no different than any other service out there.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Also may want to check CloudatCosts TOS about file sharing.. not sure their stance on that.
What the heck are you talking about? This has nothing to do with C@C. They are not the internet police and there is nothing illegal about file sharing.
If you host illegal shit and the authorities ask your host to shut you down, they will shut it down. But it is not the hosts job, directly. This is no different than any other service out there.
Some VPS and Shared hosts explicitly disallow file sharing/hosting using their services in their TOS.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Some VPS and Shared hosts explicitly disallow file sharing/hosting using their services in their TOS.
My website has an image on it. I am thus hosting files.
I am thus breaking their TOS. -
@JaredBusch said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Some VPS and Shared hosts explicitly disallow file sharing/hosting using their services in their TOS.
My website has an image on it. I am thus hosting files.
I am thus breaking their TOS.That may be the denotation of the rules, but not the connotation.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Some VPS and Shared hosts explicitly disallow file sharing/hosting using their services in their TOS.
My website has an image on it. I am thus hosting files.
I am thus breaking their TOS.There's a difference in having files that are used for the sites, and running a file host.
It's not unusual to find lines like this from VPS providers expect the bigger cloud providers (AWS/Rackspace)
"space may only be used for web files, active email and content of User Websites. Space may not be used for storage (whether of media, emails, or other data), including, as offsite storage of electronic files, email or FTP hosts."
-
@scottalanmiller said in My Misadventures with Cloud At Cost:
I always recommend CloudFlare, it's the best DNS host I have found.
I am more of a ClouDNS + BunnyCDN fan
