zlacker

Seems like my account was restricted due to https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/supplemental-terms/#cloudfl...

2.Cloudflare may, with or without notice to you and without liability of any kind, temporarily limit your storage and/or the number of requests you can make or receive using the Developer Platform for any reason (in its sole reasonable discretion), including without limitation, if processing such requests would put an undue burden on the Cloudflare network, adversely impact the Service, or otherwise threaten the integrity of Cloudflare’s networks.

To be fair I'm using lots of requests and bandwidth so could be reason, just if only I got an email about that before shutting everything down.

>>tardis+(OP)
Out of curiosity, are you connecting to third party websockets from your workers?

>>nnx+l1
no, I'm not using WebSockets at all in Workers.

>>tardis+(OP)
Unless you saw a huge spike I feel like not letting you know before is totally unacceptable.

Also, while that's in the terms that's a generic get out clause I know they need but doesn't at all help you figure out what services are ok.

>>IanCal+13
No huge spikes at all, so not sure what triggered it.

>>tardis+(OP)
Not getting a warning scares me. I moved hosting large GB+ files from DO Spaces to R2 for the free egress and have served 1 petabyte in January alone saving thousands of dollars.

>>tardis+(OP)
I think what you're showing here is the safety net that protects them if they make some missteps trying to execute what's covered by other policies. But it seems like the heart of your cancellation is the interpretation of 2.8, i.e. them deciding (probably in an automated way) that the stuff you were serving via API (significant volumes of trading data, I'd gather) does not qualify as web content.

It's definitely an unfriendly combo to have (a) a really ambiguous policy like 2.8 and (b) enforcing via a no-warning cutoff -- even if the two policies have good justifications individually. But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that part (b) is part of the sales strategy. (Part (a) obviously is meant to incentivize a paid account for applications like yours.)

>>IanCal+13
Unless you saw a huge spike I feel like not letting you know before is totally unacceptable

I agree... sort of? I mean, this is Cloudflare, right? It isn't as if a huge, legit traffic spike should tax their infra.

IMO, there should be zero shutdown for any long term client, for any reason, at all, ever, without an form of contact.

So weird to have stable uptimes, then support saying "we sorta think you were blocked because..."

So, even account info, with a valid "block" reason, isn't available to their own staff. EG, even their own staff aren't notified?!?

This is sales 101. Mega-simple stuff.

"Hi! You are doing bad thing X, and it needs to change, but we can fix that right now! Let me help you..."

>>tardis+B3
Cloudflare seems to be claiming that you did have a huge spike.

> Traffic from this customer went suddenly from an average of 1,500 requests per second, and a 0.5MB payload per request, to 3,000 requests per second (2x) and more than 12MB payload per request (25x)

https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/09/cloudflare_traffic_th...

>>Firero+p5l
I don't have a reason to not believe them in that regard, there was a spike, but it was not visible in analytics I have access to it seems.