|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Peering with a big web farm (was Re: BBN Peering Issues)
On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, David Schiffrin wrote: > Hmm, In that case, doesn't it become an advantage for the webfarm who > is now buying transit to put up the cache ? > > -dave Yes, it does. The problem here is that current caches aren't designed for content speed, and response. But with caches at the content end, it saves cross-country bandwidth for the content provider, but really doesn't help the dial-up farms. Mike Gibbs > > > > > On Wed, 12 Aug 1998 [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > If one can force all outgoing to-the-webhosted-site queries > > > > through a single web cache, and the content is (or is made to be) > > > > relatively undynamic, one has a huge caching potential. > > > > > > Amen; I didn't even see that. But, that could work to BBN's favor! > > > > If BBN wants to sell connectivity to a big web farm provider, how does > > BBN's forcing all hits through a cache help BBN? The data all still > > crosses BBN's backbone, and the the web farm provider won't need as big a > > pipe. Maybe I'm missing something, but if BBN starts charging former > > peers, I'd think caching at these edges would be a bad thing for BBN. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Jon Lewis <[email protected]> | Spammers will be winnuked or > > Network Administrator | drawn and quartered...whichever > > Florida Digital Turnpike | is more convenient. > > ______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____ > > > > >
|