[10394] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Shaw)
Tue Jul 1 11:20:15 1997
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:10:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joe Shaw <jshaw@insync.net>
To: Ken Leland <kwl@shell.monmouth.com>
cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199706302339.TAA28161@shell.monmouth.com>
Probably because you'll find that co-located web servers make the company
more money than if they put their server in the same spot or on the same
machine. Web sites for providers make them money, sure, but definitely
not as much as if they hosted mtv.com or other popular sites. So, they
put the high traffic sites where they need to be, and leave their own
servers on another part of the network, as they probably are one of the
least utilized machines there. This isn't in all cases, and blanket
statements are dangerous. But, in the majority of cases I've seen,
someone like UUNet's web site, or sprint's isn't nearly as busy as
www.playbow.com, www.comedycentral.com, etc.
Joe Shaw - jshaw@insync.net
NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services
"Learn more, and you will never starve." - Paraphrase of Lee
On Mon, 30 Jun 1997, Ken Leland wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, why do many (not all) of the large backbone providers
> establish their face to the web (their corporate webserver) on slow,
> badly positioned machines? I would have thought they would have chosen
> differently. We do, but we are not as sophisticated. I can see how
> Jack might have been confused, perhaps he is not so sophisticated also.
>
> Ken Leland
> Monmouth Internet
