Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: "IP networks will feel traffic pain in 2009" (C|Net & Cisco)
From: Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:30:36 -0500

On Jan 21, 2009, at 11:07 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

Google is not the only company which will put caches into any provider
- or school (which is really just a special case provider) - with
enough traffic.  A school with 30 machines probably would not
qualify. This is not being mean, this is just being rational. No way those 30 machines save the company enough money to pay for the caches.

Again, sux, but that's life. I'd love to hear your solution - besides writing "magic" into squid to intentionally break or alter (some would use much harsher language) content you do not own. Content others are
providing for free.

Finding ways to force object revalidation by an intermediary cache (so
the end origin server knows something has been fetched) and thus
allowing the cache to serve the content on behalf of the content
origintor, under their full control, but without the bits being served.

Excellent idea. It is a shame content owners do not see the utility in your idea.

To bring this back to an operational topic, just because a content owner does not want to work with someone on this, does the lack of external bandwidth / infrastructure / whatever make it "OK" to install a proxy which will intentionally re-write the content?


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]