This could have been avoided had more web servers properly implemented OCSP stabling (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4366#section-3.6). That way it would have been the hoster of the website rather than the issuing CA bearing the resource cost in providing the revocation status of the cert.
Just to be clear, the article discusses bandwidth load for CAs, not for individual web sites. Serving CRLs is part of what we pay CAs to do, I don't see why the article implies we should take pity on them.
Sounds like it's time to plug CRLs into BitTorrent distribution.
Also, isn't CloudFront supposed to be way, way cheaper than $10/Mbps?