0

Participate in the “Internet Slowdown” with One Click

Net Neutrality is an important issue for CloudFlare as well as for our more than 2 million customers, whose success depends on a vibrant, dynamic, and open Internet. An open Internet promotes innovation, removes barriers to entry, and provides a platform for free expression.

That's why we’re announcing a new app that lets you easily participate in the “Internet Slowdown” on September 10th, 2014.

Battleforthenet.com (a project of Demand Progress, Engine Advocacy, Fight for the Future, and Free Press) has organized a day of protest against the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposal that will allow Internet providers to charge companies additional fees to provide access to those companies’ content online. Those additional fees will allow Internet service providers to essentially choose which parts of the Internet you will get to access normally, and which parts may be slow or inaccessible.

As we’ve seen that bandwidth pricing is not reflective of the underlying fair market value when Internet service providers have monopolistic control, we can only fret that a similar situation will be presented by a lack of net neutrality.

The Battle for the Net pop-up (intentionally obtrusive) will simulate a loading screen that website users may see Continue reading

0

SXSW Interactive 2015: Vote for CloudFlare’s Submissions

Has your Twitter feed been flooded with “vote for my SXSW panel” tweets? With so much buzz all over the place, we wanted to keep it simple and share all of the presentations and panels affiliated with CloudFlare, in one place. Check out CloudFlare's presentations and panels below. If our topics interest you, casting a vote will take just a few minutes!

How to vote:

1. To sign up go to this link
2. Enter your name & email address, then confirm your account
3. Log in with your new account and go to the “PanelPicker”
4. Click “search/vote” and search for your panel by title
5. VOTE

Please note: Voting ends on September 6th!

PanelPicker voting counts for 30% of a sessions acceptance to SXSW. Our panels cover a variety of topics from a tell-all that reveals the real story behind the male/female co-founder dynamic to exploring ways to protect human rights online. There’s something for everyone so check them out and vote for your favorite! Every vote counts!

Help CloudFlare get to SXSW!

Presentations:

“Lean On” is the New “Lean In”
Matthew Prince, co-founder and CEO of CloudFlare will sit down with Michelle Zatlyn, co-founder and Head of User Experience at CloudFlare for Continue reading

0

Go interfaces make test stubbing easy

Go's "object-orientation" approach is through interfaces. Interfaces provide a way of specifying the behavior expected of an object, but rather than saying what an object itself can do, they specify what's expected of an object. If any object meets the interface specification it can be used anywhere that interface is expected.

I was working on a new, small piece of software that does image compression for CloudFlare and found a nice use for interfaces when stubbing out a complex piece of code in the unit test suite. Central to this code is a collection of goroutines that run jobs. Jobs are provided from a priority queue and performed in priority order.

The jobs ask for images to be compressed in myriad ways and the actual package that does the work contained complex code for compressing JPEGs, GIFs and PNGs. It had its own unit tests that checked that the compression worked as expected.

But I wanted a way to test the part of the code that runs the jobs (and, itself, doesn't actually know what the jobs do). Because I only want to test if the jobs got run correctly (and not the compression) I don't want to have to create (and configure) the complex job type that gets used when the code really runs.

What I wanted was a DummyJob.

The Worker package actually runs jobs in a goroutine like this:

func (w *Worker) do(id int, ready chan int) {
    for {
        ready <- id

        j, ok := <-w.In
        if !ok {
            return
        }

        if err := j.Do(); err != nil {
            logger.Printf("Error performing job %v: %s", j, err)
        }
    }
}

do gets started as a goroutine passed a unique ID (the id parameter) and a channel called ready. Whenever do is able to perform work it sends a message containing its id down ready and then waits for a job on the worker w.In channel. Many such workers run concurrently and a separate goroutine pulls the IDs of workers that are ready for work from the ready channel and sends them work.

If you look at do above you'll see that the job (stored in j) is only required to offer a single method:

func (j *CompressionJob) Do() error

The worker's do just calls the job's Do function and checks for an error return. But the code originally had w.In defined like this:

w := &Worker{In: make(chan *job.CompressionJob)}

which would have required that the test suite for Worker know how to create a CompressionJob and make it runnable. Instead I defined a new interface like this:

type Job interface {
    Priority() int
    Do() error
}

The Priority method is used by the queueing mechanism to figure out the order in which jobs should be run. Then all I needed to do was change the creation of the Worker to

w := &Worker{In: make(chan job.Job)}

The w.In channel is no longer a channel of CompressionJobs, but of interfaces of type Job. This shows a really powerful aspect of Go: anything that meets the Job interface can be sent down that channel and only a tiny amount of code had to be changed to use an interface instead of the more 'concrete' type CompressionJob.

Then in the unit test suite for Worker I was able to create a DummyJob like this:

var Done bool

type DummyJob struct {
}

func (j DummyJob) Priority() int {
    return 1
}

func (j DummyJob) Do() error {
   Done = true
   return nil
}

It sets a Done flag when the Worker's do function actually runs the DummyJob. Since DummyJob meets the Job interface it can be sent down the w.In channel to a Worker for processing.

Creating that Job interface totally isolated the interface that the Worker needs to be able to run jobs and hides any of the other details greatly simplifying the unit test suite. Most interesting of all, no changes at all were needed to CompressionJob to achieve this.

0

The Relative Cost of Bandwidth Around the World

Over the last few months, there’s been increased attention on networks and how they interconnect. CloudFlare runs a large network that interconnects with many others around the world. From our vantage point, we have incredible visibility into global network operations. Given our unique situation, we thought it might be useful to explain how networks operate, and the relative costs of Internet connectivity in different parts of the world.

A Connected Network

The Internet is a vast network made up of a collection of smaller networks. The networks that make up the Internet are connected in two main ways. Networks can connect with each other directly, in which case they are said to be “peered”, or they can connect via an intermediary network known as a “transit provider”.

At the core of the Internet are a handful of very large transit providers that all peer with one another. This group of approximately twelve companies are known as Tier 1 network providers. Whether directly or indirectly, every ISP (Internet Service Provider) around the world connects with one of these Tier 1 providers. And, since the Tier 1 providers are all interconnected themselves, from any point on the network you should be able to reach any other point. That's what makes the Internet the Internet: it’s a huge group of networks that are all interconnected.

Paying to Connect

To be a part of the Internet, CloudFlare buys bandwidth, known as transit, from a number of different providers. The rate we pay for this bandwidth varies from region to region around the world. In some cases we buy from a Tier 1 provider. In other cases, we buy from regional transit providers that either peer with the networks we need to reach directly (bypassing any Tier 1), or interconnect themselves with other transit providers.

CloudFlare buys transit wholesale and on the basis of the capacity we use in any given month. Unlike some cloud services like Amazon Web Services (AWS) or traditional CDNs that bill for individual bits delivered across a network (called "stock"), we pay for a maximum utilization for a period of time (called "flow"). Typically, we pay based on the maximum number of megabits per second we use during a month on any given provider.

Most transit agreements bill the 95th percentile of utilization in any given month. That means you throw out approximately 36 not-necessarily-contiguous hours worth of peak utilization when calculating usage for the month. Legend has it that in its early days, Google used to take advantage of these contracts by using very little bandwidth for most of the month and then ship its indexes between data centers, a very high bandwidth operation, during one 24-hour period. A clever, if undoubtedly short-lived, strategy to avoid high bandwidth bills.

Another subtlety is that when you buy transit wholesale you typically only pay for traffic coming in (“ingress") or traffic going out (“egress”) of your network, not both. Generally you pay which ever one is greater.

CloudFlare is a caching proxy so egress (out) typically exceeds ingress (in), usually by around 4-5x. Our bandwidth bill is therefore calculated on egress so we don't pay for ingress. This is part of the reason we don't charge extra when a site on our network comes under a DDoS attack. An attack increases our ingress but, unless the attack is very large, our ingress traffic will still not exceed egress, and therefore doesn’t increase our bandwidth bill.

Peering

While we pay for transit, peering directly with other providers is typically free — with some notable exceptions recently highlighted by Netflix. In CloudFlare's case, unlike Netflix, at this time, all our peering is currently "settlement free," meaning we don't pay for it. Therefore, the more we peer the less we pay for bandwidth. Peering also typically increases performance by cutting out intermediaries that may add latency. In general, peering is a good thing.

The chart above shows how CloudFlare has increased the number of networks we peer with over the last three months (both over IPv4 and IPv6). Currently, we peer around 45% of our total traffic globally (depending on the time of day), across nearly 3,000 different peering sessions. The chart below shows the split between peering and transit and how it's improved over the last three months as we’ve added more peers.

North America

We don't disclose exactly what we pay for transit, but I can give you a relative sense of regional differences. To start, let's assume as a benchmark in North America you'd pay a blended average across all the transit providers of $10/Mbps (megabit per second per month). In reality, we pay less than that, but it can serve as a benchmark, and keep the numbers round as we compare regions. If you assume that benchmark, for every 1,000Mbps (1Gbps) you'd pay $10,000/month (again, acknowledge that’s higher than reality, it’s just an illustrative benchmark and keeps the numbers round, bear with me).

While that benchmark establishes the transit price, the effective price for bandwidth in the region is the blended price of transit ($10/Mbps) and peering ($0/Mbps). Every byte delivered over peering is a would-be transit byte that doesn't need to be paid for. While North America has some of the lowest transit pricing in the world, it also has below average rates of peering. The chart below shows the split between peering and transit in the region. While it's gotten better over the last three months, North America still lags behind every other region in the world in terms of peering..

While we peer nearly 40% of traffic globally, we only peer around 20-25% in North America. Assuming the price of transit is the benchmark $10/Mbps in North America without peering, with peering it is effectively $8/Mbps. Based only on bandwidth costs, that makes it the second least expensive region in the world to provide an Internet service like CloudFlare. So what's the least expensive?

Europe

Europe's transit pricing roughly mirrors North America's so, again, assume a benchmark of $10/Mbps. While transit is priced similarly to North America, in Europe there is a significantly higher rate of peering. CloudFlare peers 50-55% of traffic in the region, making the effective bandwidth price $5/Mbps. Because of the high rate of peering and the low transit costs, Europe is the least expensive region in the world for bandwidth.

The higher rate of peering is due in part to the organization of the region's “peering exchanges”. A peering exchange is a service where networks can pay a fee to join, and then easily exchange traffic between each other without having to run individual cables between each others' routers. Networks connect to a peering exchange, run a single cable, and then can connect to many other networks. Since using a port on a router has a cost (routers cost money, have a finite number of ports, and a port used for one network cannot be used for another), and since data centers typically charge a monthly fee for running a cable between two different customers (known as a "cross connect"), connecting to one service, using one port and one cable, and then being able to connect to many networks can be very cost effective.

The value of an exchange depends on the number of networks that are a part of it. The Amsterdam Internet Exchange (AMS-IX), Frankfurt Internet Exchange (DE-CIX), and the London Internet Exchange (LINX) are three of the largest exchanges in the world. (Note: these links point to PeeringDB.com which provides information on peering between networks. You'll need to use the username/password guest/guest in order to login.)

In Europe, and most other regions outside North America, these and other exchanges are generally run as non-profit collectives set up to benefit their member networks. In North America, while there are Internet exchanges, they are typically run by for-profit companies. The largest of these for-profit exchanges in North America are run by Equinix, a data center company, which uses exchanges in its facilities to increase the value of locating equipment there. Since they are run with a profit motive, pricing to join North American exchanges is typically higher than exchanges in the rest of the world.

CloudFlare is a member of many of Equinix's exchanges, but, overall, fewer networks connect with Equinix compared with Europe's exchanges (compare, for instance, Equinix Ashburn, which is their most popular exchange with about 400 networks connected, versus 1,200 networks connected to AMS-IX). In North America the combination of relatively cheap transit, and relatively expensive exchanges lowers the value of joining an exchange. With less networks joining exchanges, there are fewer opportunities for networks to easily peer. The corollary is that in Europe transit is also cheap but peering is very easy, making the effective price of bandwidth in the region the lowest in the world.

Asia

Asia’s peering rates are similar to Europe. Like in Europe, CloudFlare peers 50-55% of traffic in Asia. However, transit pricing is significantly more expensive. Compared with the benchmark of $10/Mbps in North America and Europe, Asia's transit pricing is approximately 7x as expensive ($70/Mbps, based on the benchmark). When peering is taken into account, however, the effective price of bandwidth in the region is $32/Mbps.

There are three primary reasons transit is so much more expensive in Asia. First, there is less competition, and a greater number of large monopoly providers. Second, the market for Internet services is less mature. And finally, if you look at a map of Asia you’ll see a lot of one thing: water. Running undersea cabling is more expensive than running fiber optic cable across land so transit pricing offsets the cost of the infrastructure to move bytes.

Latin America

Latin America is CloudFlare's newest region. When we opened our first data center in Valparaíso, Chile, we delivered 100 percent of our traffic over transit, which you can see from the graph above. To peer traffic in Latin America you need to either be in a "carrier neutral" data center — which means multiple network operators come together in a single building where they can directly plug into each other's routers — or you need to be able to reach an Internet exchange. Both are in short supply in much of Latin America.

The country with the most robust peering ecosystem is Brazil, which also happens to be the largest country and largest source of traffic in the region. You can see that as we brought our São Paulo, Brazil data center online about two months ago we increased our peering in the region significantly. We've also worked out special arrangements with ISPs in Latin America to set up facilities directly in their data centers and peer with their networks, which is what we did in Medellín, Colombia.

While today our peering ratio in Latin America is the best of anywhere in the world at approximately 60 percent, the region's transit pricing is 8x ($80/Mbps) the benchmark of North America and Europe. That means the effective bandwidth pricing in the region is $32/Mbps, or approximately the same as Asia.

Australia

Australia is the most expensive region in which we operate, but for an interesting reason. We peer with virtually every ISP in the region except one: Telstra. Telstra, which controls approximately 50% of the market, and was traditionally the monopoly telecom provider, charges some of the highest transit pricing in the world — 20x the benchmark ($200/Mbps). Given that we are able to peer approximately half of our traffic, the effective bandwidth benchmark price is $100/Mbps.

To give you some sense of how out-of-whack Australia is, at CloudFlare we pay about as much every month for bandwidth to serve all of Europe as we do to for Australia. That’s in spite of the fact that approximately 33x the number of people live in Europe (750 million) versus Australia (22 million).

If Australians wonder why Internet and many other services are more expensive in their country than anywhere else in the world they need only look to Telstra. What's interesting is that Telstra maintains their high pricing even if only delivering traffic inside the country. Given that Australia is one large land mass with relatively concentrated population centers, it's difficult to justify the pricing based on anything other than Telstra's market power. In regions like North America where there is increasing consolidation of networks, Australia's experience with Telstra provides a cautionary tale.

Conclusion

While we keep our pricing at CloudFlare straight forward, charging a flat rate regardless of where traffic is delivered around the world, actual bandwidth prices vary dramatically between regions. We’ll continue to work to decrease our transit pricing, and increasing our peering in order to offer the best possible service at the lowest possible price. In the meantime, if you’re an ISP who wants to offer better connectivity to the increasing portion of the Internet behind CloudFlare’s network, we have an open policy and are always happy to peer.

0

DIY Web Server: Raspberry Pi + CloudFlare

The Raspberry Pi was created with a simple mission in mind: change the way people interact with computers. This inexpensive, credit card-sized machine is encouraging people, especially kids, to start playing with computers, not on them.

When the first computers came out, basic programming skills were necessary. This was the age of the Amigas, BBC Micros, the Spectrum ZX, and Commodore 64s. The generation that grew up with these machines gained a fundamental understanding how how computers work.

Computers today are easy to use and require zero understanding of programming to operate. They’re also expensive, and wrapped in sleek cases. While aesthetically pleasing designs and user friendly interfaces make computers appealing and accessible to everyone, these advances create a barrier to understanding how computers work and what they are capable of doing. This isn’t necessarily a problem, but for those who really understand computers, it seems that our collective sense of the power of computing has been dulled.

Raspberry Pi marks the beginning of a conscious effort to return to computing fundamentals. Starting at about $25—case not included—it’s purposely designed to remove barriers to tinkering, reprograming, and, ultimately, to understanding how computers work. This return to fundamentals is rejuvenating the Continue reading

0

CloudFlare hiring Go programmers in London and San Francisco

Are you familiar with the Go programming language and looking for a job in San Francisco or London? Then think about applying to CloudFlare. We're looking for people with experience writing Go in both locations.

CC BY-SA 2.0 by Yuko Honda (cropped, resized)

CloudFlare uses Go extensively to build our service and we need to people to build and maintain those systems. We've written a complete DNS server in Go, our Railgun service is all Go and we're moving more and more systems to Go programs.

We've recently written about our open source Red October Go project for securing secrets, and open-sourced our CFSSL Go-based PKI package. Go is now making its way into our data pipeline and be used for processing huge amounts of data.

We even have a Go-specific section on our GitHub.

If you're interested in working in Go on a high-performance global network like CloudFlare, send us an email.

Not into Go? We're hiring for all sorts of other positions and technologies.

0

Tinfoil Security vulnerability scanning now easy in CloudFlare Apps

We’re pleased to introduce a new CloudFlare App: Tinfoil Security. Tinfoil Security is a service designed to find possible web application vulnerabilities.

Security is central to CloudFlare's service. Our security features operate at the network level to identify and block malicious traffic from ever reaching your website or application. However, even with that protection in place, it’s still worth fixing problems at the application layer as well.

Tinfoil Security helps website owners learn about possible vulnerabilities in their applications by scanning for vulnerabilities, tests all access points, and providing step-by-step introductions on eliminating threats if found.

Their developer-focused reports can be tied into continuous integration lifecycle with API hooks for kicking off new scans after changes are made.

Tinfoil offers several price points, including a free plan that checks for XSS (Cross-Site Scripting) concerns. The Tinfoil app is a quick and easy addition to your CloudFlare service. Take a look!

0

Google Now Factoring HTTPS Support Into Ranking; CloudFlare On Track to Make it Free and Easy

As of today, there are only about 2 million websites that support HTTPS. That's a shamefully low number. Two things are about to happen that we at CloudFlare are hopeful will begin to change that and make everyone love locks (at least on the web!).

CC BY 2.0 by Gregg Tavares

Google Ranks Crypto

First, Google just announced that they will begin taking into account whether a site supports HTTPS connections in their ranking algorithm. This means that if you care about SEO then ensuring your site supports HTTPS should be a top priority. Kudos to Google to giving webmasters a big incentive to add SSL to their sites.

SSL All Things

Second, at CloudFlare we've cleared one of the last major technical hurdle before making SSL available for every one of our customers -- even free customers. One of the challenges we had was ensuring we still had the flexibility to move traffic to sites dynamically between the servers that make up our network. While we can do this easily when traffic is over an HTTP connection, when a connection uses HTTPS we need to ensure that the correct certificates are in place and loaded into memory Continue reading

0

CloudFlare Now Supports WebSockets

CC BY 2.0 from Brian Snelson

I'm pleased to announce that CloudFlare now supports WebSockets. The ability to protect and accelerate WebSockets has been one of our most requested features. As of today, CloudFlare is rolling out WebSocket support for any Enterprise customer, and a limited set of CloudFlare Business customers. Over the coming months, we expect to extend support to all Business and Pro customers.

We're rolling out WebSockets slowly because it presents a new set of challenges. The story below chronicles the challenges of supporting WebSockets, and what we’ve done to overcome them.

The Web Before WebSockets

Before diving into WebSockets, it's important to understand HTTP—the traditional protocol of the web. HTTP supports a number of different methods by which a request can be sent to a server. When you click on a traditional link you are sending a GET request to a web server. The web server receives the request, then sends a response.

When you submit a web form (such as when you're giving your username and password when logging into an account) you use another HTTP method called POST, but the interaction is functionally the same. Your browser (called the ‘client’) sends data to Continue reading

0

Experimenting with mozjpeg 2.0

One of the services that CloudFlare provides to paying customers is called Polish. Polish automatically recompresses images cached by CloudFlare to ensure that they are as small as possible and can be delivered to web browsers as quickly as possible.

We've recently rolled out a new version of Polish that uses updated techniques (and was completely rewritten from a collection of programs into a single executable written in Go). As part of that rewrite we looked at the performance of the recently released mozjpeg 2.0 project for JPEG compression.

To get a sense of its performance (both in terms of compression and in terms of CPU usage) when compared to libjpeg-turbo I randomly selected 10,000 JPEG images (totaling 2,564,135,285 bytes for an average image size of about 256KB) cached by CloudFlare and recompressed them using the jpegtran program provided by libjpeg-turbo 1.3.1 and mozjpeg 2.0. The exact command used in both cases was:

jpegtran -outfile out.jpg -optimise -copy none in.jpg

Of the 10,000 images in cache, mozjpeg 2.0 failed to make 691 of them any smaller compared with 3,471 for libjpeg-turbo. So mozjpeg 2.0 was significantly better at recompressing images.

On average Continue reading

0

Listo! Medellin, Colombia: CloudFlare’s 28th Data Center

With the World Cup at an end, so too is our latest round of data center expansion. Following deployments in Madrid, Milan and São Paulo, we are thrilled to announce our 28th data center in Medellin, Colombia. Most of Colombia’s 22 million Internet users are now mere milliseconds away from a CloudFlare data center.

A data center unlike the others

Our deployment in Medellin is launched in partnership with Internexa, operators of the largest terrestrial communications network (IP backbone) in Latin America. Internexa operates over 28,000 km of fibre crossing seven countries in the continent. Our partnership was formed over a shared vision to build a better Internet—in this case, by localizing access to content within the region. Today, it is estimated that as much as 80% of content accessed in Latin America comes from overseas. It is with great pride that, as of now, all 2 million sites using CloudFlare are available locally over Internexa’s IP backbone. Let’s just say we’ve taken a bite out of this percentage (and latency)!

If your Internet service provider (ISP) is not connected to Internexa, Continue reading

0

Courage to change things

This was an internal email that I sent to the CloudFlare team about how we are not afraid to throw away old code. We thought it was worth sharing with a wider audience.

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:24:21 +0100
Subject: Courage to change things
From: John Graham-Cumming
To: Everyone

Folks,

At the Q3 planning meeting I started by making some remarks about how much
code we are changing at CloudFlare. I understand that there were audio
problems and people may not have heard these clearly, so I'm just going to
reiterate them in writing.

One of the things that CloudFlare is being brave about is looking at old code
and deciding to rewrite it. Lots of companies live with legacy code and build
on it and it eventuallybecomes a maintenance nightmare and slows the company
down.

Over the last year we've made major strides in rewriting parts of our code
base so that they are faster, more maintainable, and easier to enhance. There
are many parts of the Q3 roadmap that include replacing old parts of our
stack. This is incredibly important as it enables us to be more agile and 
more stable in future.

We should feel good  Continue reading

0

CloudFlare Joins Three More Peering Exchanges in Australia

In the coming weeks, connectivity to CloudFlare in Australia is going to a new level. As part of CloudFlare’s ongoing upgrades program, we established connections to three new Internet exchanges: the Megaport Internet exchanges in Sydney, Brisbane, and Melbourne. These connections doubled the number of Australian Internet exchanges we reach and marked the first exchanges outside of Sydney that Cloudflare participates in.

What is Peering?

When two ISPs peer, they agree to exchange traffic directly between each other rather than sending it a third party. By doing this, both partners avoid congested paths between transit providers, and they avoid paying to ship traffic—it's win-win!

What peering exchanges mean for CloudFlare is that we can significantly increase our service performance to users on ISPs that peer with us. Take Australia for example, for users who are currently on ISPs peering at Megaport, instead of CloudFlare sending traffic to the transit providers of those ISPs, we can now route the traffic directly to them. The result is lower latency, and traffic taking paths that are often less congested.

Low latency is crucial for internet speed due to the nature of TCP, the fundamental protocol on which the internet is built. TCP operates Continue reading