Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: "IP networks will feel traffic pain in 2009" (C|Net & Cisco)
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc () internode com au>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:34:58 +1030

Surely the whole point of this is that the end users (the eyeballs) get the best experience they can as they're the ultimate consumer. So working with everyone in the chain between the content owner and the eyeballs is important.

If you're a content owner then you want the experience to be good so that either you sell more ads or that your "brand" (whatever that may mean) is well thought of.

It's why content owners use CDNs - to ensure that it's delivered close to the end user.

Surely that means, logically to me anyway, that working with caching providers local to the eyeballs is the next logical point. Certainly for the heavy bits that don't change (eg the video streams Adrian mentioned).

It's a mutual benefit thing - if your content sucks for a school (for example) to use then they're not going to use it. That's not good for you as a content owner.

I realise that CDNs probably aren't that keen on people caching as it reduces their revenue, but a level of being rational about helping the whole chain deliver means probably more traffic overall.


On 22/01/2009, at 8:13 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

(Or the people having to deliver said content to said eyeballs, and
aren't being paid by the content deliverer on their behalf.)

No, it does not.

If I own something, it doesn't matter how "important" the people who want to buy it are.

But I guess that's not operational.


  By Date           By Thread  

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