[196108] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: isp/cdn caching
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Tue Oct 3 04:57:53 2017
X-Original-To: Nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 13:49:11 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: NANOG list <Nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAL89Sg+BU3ENXEpOwoDZ4VVJAPsQZHe29qsQF1mMJuhV+p8QDA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
*nods* I'm obviously a bit biased, but I have some reasoning behind it. Als=
o, this is excluding large scale networks like Comcast, AT&T, Charter, etc.=
that do have the scale to have on-net solutions. It's also excluding remot=
e locations where there may not be another node for hundreds or thousands o=
f miles (Alaska, Hawaii, Caribbean, etc.)=20
There are some CDNs that are pushing out on-net boxes and PNIs to networks =
with relatively low usage. We've had networks that were in the process of j=
oining the IX get approached by one of the CDNs for a box right on their ne=
twork. That network had under 1G of usage (IIRC) and was joining an IX wher=
e the CDN was already present. The network declined the box because they di=
dn't want something else to manage and would already get the service anyway=
once on the IX.=20
Also, from my understanding of multiple CDNs (nothing really proprietary, j=
ust whatever's been made public) is that different nodes have different con=
tent. The more traffic a node gets, the more likely they are to have the co=
ntent the end user seeks. Some CDNs also have different platforms on differ=
ent boxes. If an ISP has one box, they may not even have access to all of t=
he platforms that would be available in a several box deployment. In these =
cases, an IX makes more sense.=20
We've also had CDNs go the PNI route to a network. Sure, a PNI beats an IX =
in that it cuts out a middle man (fiscally and point of failure). However, =
if the networks wouldn't use a substantial portion of the IX port in the fi=
rst place, it's an extra cost that small networks may not have room for or =
have to choose between a PNI and an IX.=20
Per the last message, Cloudflare seems to have a similar philosophy. Join e=
xisting infrastructure where it makes sense, deploy additional nodes otherw=
ise.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
Midwest Internet Exchange=20
The Brothers WISP=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Paseka via NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
To: "Marco Slater" <marco@marcoslater.com>=20
Cc: "NANOG list" <Nanog@nanog.org>=20
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 1:21:10 PM=20
Subject: Re: isp/cdn caching=20
Hi,=20
Cloudflare does deploy caches, however we usually look to do so in unique=
=20
locations, ie. where an ISPs network isn't already in reach of one of our=
=20
existing deployments/peering points.=20
You can email peering@cloudflare.com directly if seeking this.=20
-Tom=20
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Marco Slater <marco@marcoslater.com> wrote=
:=20
> Do they publicly have any more info on this?=20
>=20
> I thought CloudFlare didn=E2=80=99t consider doing that because of their =
vast=20
> coverage and peering arrangements provided by their PoPs.=20
>=20
> Regards,=20
> Marco Slater=20
>=20
> > On 29 Sep 2017, at 14:38, <michalis.bersimis@hq.cyta.gr> <=20
> michalis.bersimis@hq.cyta.gr> wrote:=20
> >=20
> > I think that Cloudflare has a caching solution, but I think they have=
=20
> strict requirements towards the isp in order to install them on their=20
> premises.=20
> >=20
> > Best Regards,=20
> >=20
> > Michalis Bersimis=20
> >=20
> > -----Original Message-----=20
> > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Gould=
=20
> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:25 PM=20
> > To: Nanog@nanog.org=20
> > Subject: isp/cdn caching=20
> >=20
> > Hi, I've been aware of a few caching providers for a few years now, but=
=20
> I'm learning of others as time goes on. which makes me curious if there a=
re=20
> more springing up and gaining popularity. I'm speaking of ISP-type cachin=
g=20
> whereas the cache provider sends hardware servers and perhaps a switch to=
=20
> the local ISP to install locally in their network. Can someone please sen=
d=20
> a simple list of what they know is the current players in this ISP Cachin=
g=20
> space? I'll list the ones I know about and you please let me know of=20
> others. This seems to be an evolving/growing thing and I'm curious of=20
> where we are today for significant providers and possibly up-and-coming=
=20
> ones that I should know about. (amazon prime has my wondering also.)=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Google (GGC)=20
> >=20
> > Netflix (OCA)=20
> >=20
> > Akamai (AANP)=20
> >=20
> > Facebook (FNA)=20
> >=20
> > Apple (I heard this isn't isp-located like the others, but unsure)=20
> >=20
> > ? others ?=20
> >=20
> > ? others ?=20
> >=20
> > ? others ?=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -Aaron Gould=20
> >=20
>=20
>=20
