All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
new CDN.net - does this make sense?
http://cdn.net/pricing-stats/ << we've been thinking about how CDN's are sold.
When I've used CDN's in the past it's always been to get a lower latency, and I suspect it's top of mind of most people looking for CDN services.
Yet - for some reason it's not what CDN providers are generally selling. They are selling GB's, distributed over a number of pops. They do not present a lot of transparency or actually show you what latency improvements you are paying for.
We've tried to change that here: http://cdn.net/pricing-stats/ - is it clear? Does it make sense? Would you chose the map or the graphs as the initial image? Do you get the 50ms green line? What would you change (apart from making it look better on mobile)?
Thanks for your input!
D
Comments
It makes no sense to me. I mean, Worldwide latency avg: 5.94ms. You're telling me that everyone is going to have a (on average) 5.94 ms latency to my website? That's an absurd speed and if you could pull that off, you'd probably just be focusing on the CDN given in what hot demand it'd be in.
There is cedexis offering multiple benchmarking metrics and you can compare the major cdn provider's performance.
http://www.cedexis.com/reports/#?report=cdn_response_time&country=US&date=2015-10-08
The map makes a lot more sense to me on first impression. With the graph you have to go thru all the colors to make any sense of the data.
Does not look like anycast, right?
For a CDN company, your site sure does take awhile to load for me... Looks like everything is loading locally off the server in the UK and not via a CDN, so when I ping the URL assets are loading from:
Kinda rough considering your western US chart is showing <1ms avg latency.
https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/5618773becbe400bf8001d55/
You can buy all the domains you want, but it will take some actual knowledge on the product to even be mentioned in the same sentence as Cedexis.
http://ping.pe/cdn.net
Oh, HostDime is under 10ms though!
Do you have test IPs for the individual services for us to test out ourselves?
@ditlev ?
PING cdn.net results in ~221ms from San Francisco California.
Not sure about the website, but the CDN itself sucks, sorry.
RU -> NL -> DE. Okay, maybe just bad luck?
Let's see from Spain:
Routed to London. I don't need a CDN for that.
Okay, okay, maybe I was just trying with small ISPs and it was just a coincidence. Let's try i3D in The Netherlands then:
Routed to f***ing New York City.
Indonesia/Asia
where's your test IP ??
let's test their own website
traceroute
LOW LATENCY CDN!!!
Yeah that's absolutely crazy, I thought CDN.net was pretty decent - as they're probably the most popular.
Shocking results.
Try akamai.com.
Using Akamai through XCDN (by Exceda)
Seemed shady at first to go through a reseller, but within 24 hours they setup a full proper Akamai setup w/ custom domain. I pay $8 USD per month for every CDN location Akamai has and never have gone beyond overages.
Just works and makes sense. Also, I would love to see you throw some Mainland China into your averages, HK and JP are a cakewalk. Even India isn't a struggle.
And 100ms to AU, pathetic. Please learn BGP / Anycast. And then return when you have a SYD / Brazil PoP online if be asking for $100/mo.
Didn't realize his sig, it's the standard OnApp CDN.. which KeyCDN outperforms at less than half the cost (from my experience/testing).
Is that $8 per zone? (ie. can you have multiple zones on those plans)
$8/mo to Exceda. Multiple zones / vanity CNAMEs that resolve to akamai.net rDNS. Not a cheap sub-plan type setup or less premium.
Keep it under 100GB and it'll only be $8, otherwise 9 cents per GB over.
>
Yeah, that's fine. I'm just handling small-ish site assets, I think I'm around 40GB/mo right now across multiple low to moderately trafficked sites. Just gets pricey at $8/mo if I can only use 1 zone per plan - but if I can spread that account across 5-10 domains/zones then it'd be perfect. Killer pricing for Akamai quality.
Hmm, Akamai still chooses the PoP to serve from based on where the DNS resolver is, right? Has anything been done to fix nameserver 8.8.8.8 / Akamai interoperability?
Ah, found the answer to this https://www.quora.com/OpenDNS/Why-doesnt-Akamai-support-the-EDNS-client-subnet-extension (despite the article title it -is- currently supported for Google's DNS servers, and possibly others that have signed an agreement with Akamai, but it is not supported by default for all resolvers).
"XCDN is not currently available in your region."
OK...
So bad, no SSL suppprt...
wow such premium route - AT to NL even though my ISP has heavy DECIX peering which is 20ms more near...
Thanks for all your feedback.
Ive upped some speedtest files here: http://www.latency.network/ just did this myself, so no fancy design or features.
My point with the post was more around the actual order process, to see if it made sense to you guys to sell at a fixed price with different levels of transfer incl. And if the overview of the ping times in the different packages made sense as well.
Thanks anyway guys!
D
From New Jersey, I'm getting 20 - 25 ms. So, I just don't see where you're pulling your numbers from? I think that's the problem. You're putting up 1 ms average, but where are you getting that from? That's not really a feasible average latency.
we use the APIs and monitor from http://www.monitis.com to test the locations constantly and generate the graphs based on their data.
-.- You're testing from datacenter to datacenter, which isn't really fair, since most people don't live in datacenters.
True, fair comment - not sure how else I could automate this though...
For real world numbers, you can't. The only thing you could do is try and get a bunch of people to run the tests and then use those numbers.
yup, but those would always be biased, and performance tend to change over time. Here I provide a realtime view on how the traffic is NOW.
I guess I could set it up as an index number and show the different packages as an index value rather than in ms?
The problem with the providing speed in terms ms is that no one will actually see that performance. You're going to get hit with a lot of complaints and refund requests. You're promising 1 ms, but sites won't get that.
CDN-X, CDN-EXEC & CDN-LUX; someone's been using Uber in London I see.