[110902] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "IP networks will feel traffic pain in 2009" (C|Net & Cisco)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Wed Jan 21 16:30:42 2009
From: Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090121160733.GA21304@skywalker.creative.net.au>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:30:36 -0500
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
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?
--
TTFN,
patrick
