Traffic Preference (new poll)

ralf

You missed option 5 - use all your monthly bandwidth and then have to pay another month to have access restored, even if there's only one day left in the billing period and the extra bandwidth won't be rolled over to the next month.

Don't pick option 5.

Fubukibox

I own Equinix stock!!

miniopt

Either 1 or 3. 2 means that you don't know what you're getting, it's at the provider's discretion.

rm_

@rpqu said: Many offer 1gbps at less than $100. Unless it's exotic transit

Could be, but you should double-check if those are really guaranteed dedicated bandwidth, or just best effort.

anio

In this case, honesty and quality are what matter most. That’s why it’s probably best to set clear terms from the start—terms that are fair. So the option with good speeds but a 2 TB BW is the best choice.
(As for fair use, most people don't even read the rules and then complain to customer support ~100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous)

Fubukibox

@anio said:
In this case, honesty and quality are what matter most. That’s why it’s probably best to set clear terms from the start—terms that are fair. So the option with good speeds but a 2 TB BW is the best choice.
(As for fair use, most people don't even read the rules and then complain to customer support ~100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous)

"100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous"

100-200Mbps is good enough for small hosting. I suspect you used ChatGPT to write this

anio

@Fubukibox said:

@anio said:
In this case, honesty and quality are what matter most. That’s why it’s probably best to set clear terms from the start—terms that are fair. So the option with good speeds but a 2 TB BW is the best choice.
(As for fair use, most people don't even read the rules and then complain to customer support ~100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous)

"100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous"

100-200Mbps is good enough for small hosting. I suspect you used ChatGPT to write this

First of all, my projects involve infrastructure, so speed and network stability are important to me. Second, does “for small hosting” mean for 100–200 people? Even for a small service, 100 Mbps will become a bottleneck; 250–500 Mbps is still acceptable, but anything lower isn’t.

Fubukibox

@anio said:

@Fubukibox said:

@anio said:
In this case, honesty and quality are what matter most. That’s why it’s probably best to set clear terms from the start—terms that are fair. So the option with good speeds but a 2 TB BW is the best choice.
(As for fair use, most people don't even read the rules and then complain to customer support ~100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous)

"100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous"

100-200Mbps is good enough for small hosting. I suspect you used ChatGPT to write this

First of all, my projects involve infrastructure, so speed and network stability are important to me. Second, does “for small hosting” mean for 100–200 people? Even for a small service, 100 Mbps will become a bottleneck; 250–500 Mbps is still acceptable, but anything lower isn’t.

"does 'for small hosting' mean for 100–200 people?"

have you ever hosted a personal blog or website? im not talking about a forum with 100-200 concurrent users. 100Mbps is fine for small personal stuff, a blog, a landing page, a small api and so on. your use case is clearly different and that's fine, but don't set your baseline as the standard for everyone else

anio

Well, I mostly agree with you, but when it comes to fair use*, I still think it’s better to be upfront and honest from the start no redirects to the ToS and offer a plan that’s “normal but unmetered,” fast, and has a reasonable bw.

CheepCluck

@Fubukibox said:
I own Equinix stock!!

My uncle's gardeners mistress knows the CEO

totally_not_banned

@ralf said:
You missed option 5 - use all your monthly bandwidth and then have to pay another month to have access restored, even if there's only one day left in the billing period and the extra bandwidth won't be rolled over to the next month.

Don't pick option 5.

Now that you say it i notice there's also an option 6 that is missing: Use all your monthly data, continue like nothing ever happened and get hit with a massive surprise bill on the first of the next month.

rpqu

@anio said:

@Fubukibox said:

@anio said:
In this case, honesty and quality are what matter most. That’s why it’s probably best to set clear terms from the start—terms that are fair. So the option with good speeds but a 2 TB BW is the best choice.
(As for fair use, most people don't even read the rules and then complain to customer support ~100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous)

"100–200 Mbps in 2026 is just ridiculous"

100-200Mbps is good enough for small hosting. I suspect you used ChatGPT to write this

First of all, my projects involve infrastructure, so speed and network stability are important to me. Second, does “for small hosting” mean for 100–200 people? Even for a small service, 100 Mbps will become a bottleneck; 250–500 Mbps is still acceptable, but anything lower isn’t.

That's where CF came in. Cache the large assets.

ailice

Option 1 was the best option spot, I didnt want wait took 13 min to upload my 10GB artifact ISO on 100Mbps on first deploy which kinda funny.

rpqu

@ailice said:
Option 1 was the best option spot, I didnt want wait took 13 min to upload my 10GB artifact ISO on 100Mbps on first deploy which kinda funny.

Should have compressed them first. 13 minutes is fast enough

Protocol903

or
20TB at 1-10gbps. Maxing out port, even if within limit, for example, longer than x duration like 40-60 minutes is big nono and throttle to 50mbps.

aluy

@Protocol903 said:
or
20TB at 1-10gbps. Maxing out port, even if within limit, for example, longer than x duration like 40-60 minutes is big nono and throttle to 50mbps.

this is interesting, ive never thought about this. nice idea too
and then maybe dethrottle after some time too? so its kinda a loop x)