> If CloudFlare is running IPFS naked, then IPFS seems to be scaling. > If CloudFlare is caching IPFS, then it is CloudFlare saving their butts. They are cach

> If CloudFlare is running IPFS naked, then IPFS seems to be scaling. > If CloudFlare is caching IPFS, then it is CloudFlare saving their butts. They are caching IPFS for people who don't support IPFS. They are not caching IPFS for people who do support IPFS, and instead passing the user through to the IPFS servers. Which means Cloudflare is indeed saving their butts, because as soon as IPFS has widespread support, this falls flat on its face. Same as traditional hosting would without a CDN. Their IPFS setup may be able to distribute the load enough to avoid an internet hug crippling it (that's part of IPFS's point), but this setup in no way demonstrates that.