Static content not at mydomain.com. Bad for SEO?

[MarvinH]

A few days ago I changed the URLs of all my static content. I skipped the vanity domain CNAME cdn.mydomain.com, and just referenced the CDN URL directly in my HTML:

OLD URL:

http://cdn.mydomain.com/sample.jpg

New URL:

http://wac.4c7d.somecdn.net/804c7d/www.mydomain.com/sample.jpg

I should have asked this before implementing the change, but do people have experience with this type of change? Is there a chance G may dislike that a site no longer hosts images/css/js at mydomain.com and instead the static content is at, for example, wac.4c7d.somecdn.net?

[tedster]

That is an approach the Google's own PageSpeed tool recommends, so you certainly did something astute. Not that complications don't pop up sometimes, but I wouldn't expect a problem.

[MarvinH]

Thanks, Tedster. Just to clarify, I've had my static content on this CDN for a number of months. The recent change, which I asked about in my post, is simply that I stopped using the vanity domain CNAME: cdn.mydomain.com, and instead I started to referenced the CDN URL directly (hoping to save a few milliseconds this way).

[tedster]

I get you - still, I wouldn't expect to see any issues at all.