Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Doesn't matter.

Single or million boxes, if they apply wrong config, it doesn't work.

You dual home because you hedge your bets and hope no 2 ISPs gonna have fuckup at same time



I think you’re suggesting that some redundancy you get by accident — by having two ISPs — is better than the redundancy a single ISP could engineer.

That’s certainly possible in specific cases, but not a very good general principle to rely on. One CF could very well be better than two given ISPs.


I'd suggest dusting off some math and calculating JUST HOW MUCH CF would need to be better compared to having 2 different ISPs fail at same time.

We had not that happen in 10 years

> That’s certainly possible in specific cases, but not a very good general principle to rely on. One CF could very well be better than two given ISPs.

You might think that if you have no idea what are you doing.


That’s a false dichotomy. You can absolutely have two ISPs, one of whom is CF.


Sorry, that's not a false dichotomy.

A second ISP isn't free, it has significant costs in terms of dollars and complexity. The question is, does CF and another provider have significant benefits to justify the additional costs? For it to make sense you have to believe the redundancy CF provides is significantly lacking (and in a way that adding a second provider addresses). Maybe it's true, but it would be nuts to just assume it and start spending a lot of money.


The cost is few k's at most, not exactly massive cost for medium sized company or bigger.

We pay x10 for power alone




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: