Comments for NearlyFreeSpeech.NET Blog https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net A blog from the staff at NearlyFreeSpeech.NET. Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:56:20 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by jdw https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29507 Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:56:20 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29507 Good question, I’m not sure that’s been tested. In theory it should work, though you would definitely want to try it out thoroughly before adopting it as a strategy. Some fussing with headers might be required. -jdw

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by SV https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29506 Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:46:42 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29506 Does the gzip compression also work the other way? If I’m serving only compressed files to save disk space, do you serve and cache the uncompressed files?

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by jdw https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29502 Thu, 07 Apr 2016 04:16:53 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29502 It does not. -jdw

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by ACE https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29501 Thu, 07 Apr 2016 04:06:44 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29501 does the automatic gzip compression require any setup?

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by Zack https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29492 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:15:15 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29492 I’m not Kinak, but the improvement I am really jonesing for on the TLS front is a better interface to certificate management. I see that you’ve said on the member forum that integrated support for Let’s Encrypt is coming, and that’ll make me 100% happy, but probably not everyone wants to jump ship from their existing CAs; options for those people that are less manual and error-prone would be nice too.

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by Wizek https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29491 Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:47:41 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29491 Nice! Thanks for the WebSocket support! I’ve been hoping for that one for a while!

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by jdw https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29490 Wed, 02 Mar 2016 23:28:29 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29490 What progress are you looking forward to? Our TLS support is already excellent; it’s well-supported, easier to set up, more reliable than ever, and requires no fighting with config files on your part (unless you want to bump the automatic A-rating from SSLLabs to an A+ by enabling strict transport security). What the beta offers is primarily scalability, so we have a viable answer to the question “What would happen if every member decided to activate TLS on all their sites tomorrow?” As with all parts of our service, we’ll keep working to make it even better, but it’s pretty darned good as-is.
-jdw

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by Kinak https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29489 Wed, 02 Mar 2016 23:05:38 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29489 Really looking forward to progress on the TLS front. Thanks for all your hard work!

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by jdw https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29488 Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:53:45 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29488 Node.js is probably the easiest — that’s what our demo site uses — but any language that we support that can implement WebSockets can be made to work. Someone is going to have a site here with WebSockets running in Haskell before you know it.

WebSockets support went live Sunday night and the NPM websockets module is already available in the white realm.

-jdw

]]>
Comment on Unlimited free bandwidth!* (*Some limitations apply.) by Steve https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/2016/02/19/unlimited_free_bandwidth_some_limitations_apply/comment-page-1/#comment-29487 Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:47:10 +0000 https://blog.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=566#comment-29487 Websockets – very nice. What server side language can we create the server code with? Example: Node.js

https://www.npmjs.com/package/nodejs-websocket

]]>