RE: [nznog] Google and MaxNet
In the past, caching has made some sense for accelerating content to clients.
I like it when I download a service pack from microsoft (for example) and the 100MB comes in at 20Mbps instead of the 512kbps that my international pipe is limited to. The fact that it may only technically be local traffic but I get charged for international traffic makes no difference because I would have no choice but to be paying international rates if there was no cache. When security/antivirus vendors release patches and updates is there a large increase in international bandwidth use or do the caches assist there? Caching must also be good for sites where there limited bandwith is at the server end too. -- Regan
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Regan Murphy wrote:
In the past, caching has made some sense for accelerating content to clients.
I like it when I download a service pack from microsoft (for example) and the 100MB comes in at 20Mbps instead of the 512kbps that my international pipe is limited to. The fact that it may only technically be local traffic but I get charged for international traffic makes no difference because I would have no choice but to be paying international rates if there was no cache.
When security/antivirus vendors release patches and updates is there a large increase in international bandwidth use or do the caches assist there?
Caching must also be good for sites where there limited bandwith is at the server end too.
Much if not most of the things you mention aree part of Akamai and there are at least three Akamai clusters in NZ that I know of - which would mean all this is national traffic. -- Steve.
Most people differentiate traffic charging based upon route path it takes, not the domainname that is associated with it, as a result this would tend to be charged as either local or national traffic. You may find some ISP's have differeing ways of charging for traffic.. but if you are getting charged international rates for something to go across APE then you're being ripped off. -- Steve. On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Steve wrote:
Much if not most of the things you mention aree part of Akamai and there are at least three Akamai clusters in NZ that I know of - which would mean all this is national traffic.
At international rates?
Steve wrote:
Most people differentiate traffic charging based upon route path it takes, not the domainname that is associated with it, as a result this would tend to be charged as either local or national traffic.
You may find some ISP's have differeing ways of charging for traffic.. but if you are getting charged international rates for something to go across APE then you're being ripped off.
Guess I shouldn't mention Telecom's ADSL here... -- Juha
Heh.. Telecom ADSL's charges are for the data traveling across the telecom data network, regardless where its come from.. This is a different situation altogether.. -----Original Message----- From: Juha Saarinen [mailto:juha(a)saarinen.org] Sent: Thursday, 10 June 2004 11:05 a.m. To: Steve Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Google and MaxNet Steve wrote:
Most people differentiate traffic charging based upon route path it takes, not the domainname that is associated with it, as a result this would tend to be charged as either local or national traffic.
You may find some ISP's have differeing ways of charging for traffic.. but if you are getting charged international rates for something to go across APE then you're being ripped off.
Guess I shouldn't mention Telecom's ADSL here... -- Juha _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
participants (4)
-
Craig Spiers -
Juha Saarinen -
Regan Murphy -
Steve