[SATLUG] OT-Time Warner Download Cap
brad at shub-internet.org
Fri Jun 6 19:56:02 CDT 2008
Mark Spieth wrote:
> Now if you think that “Partnering” is going to make up for that, you are
> sadly mistaken. What exactly are you going to cache to make up for that
> much of an offset in bandwidth? Do we cache Youtube, and the pirated
> movie sites, streaming barnyard animal porn, all the Linux distros,
> Microsoft updates?? I mean come on; we are talking about Petabytes of
> data here.
Actually, all it takes is partnering with a few of the existing content
delivery networks, and then setting up proxy caches that should handle most
of the rest.
We did this when I was working at Belgacom Skynet by partnering with Akamai.
Overnight, we started delivering 8MBps pretty consistently to the other
Belgian ISPs because we had the first Akamai servers in the country, and now
they were taking this content in via their hugely expensive in-country WAN
connections instead of their much cheaper international WAN connections.
Our bills went way down, because we were owned by the former PTT and
incumbent telco, so our in-country bandwidth was relatively cheap, and our
international bandwidth was expensive by comparison. We reduced our
bandwidth costs by quite a bit, just with that one partnership.
Akamai is not the only CDN, but they are the biggest, and it doesn't take
too many parnterships like this to shave off a huge chunk of the WAN
Proxy caching for P2P applications is already proven to get you way, way
better than that. Look at the P4P partnerships that Comcast is working on.
The proof that these techniques already exists, in the form of all the
existing success stories out there for people who have already partnered
with the CDNs, the P4P work, and the business relationships that
bittorrent.com is working on.
You don't even have to look that hard.
Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>
LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
More information about the SATLUG