[31787] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: decreased caching efficiency?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Majdi S. Abbas)
Fri Oct 20 12:30:30 2000
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:33:42 -0700
From: "Majdi S. Abbas" <msa@samurai.sfo.dead-dog.com>
To: Dana Hudes <dhudes@hudes.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001020093342.C26859@samurai.sfo.dead-dog.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <008b01c03aa1$74607cc0$3d5cdcd1@hudes.org>; from dhudes@hudes.org on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 10:24:27AM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 10:24:27AM -0400, Dana Hudes wrote:
> No, you are interfering with my revenue stream by preventing
> my getting credit for the banner impression.
Tough. Banner ads aren't a guaranteed form of revenue.
How would you feel if I said my cache at home filters banner
content out? You do not have a guaranteed right to spew
advertisements. If banner revenue is a large part of your
revenue model, I think you need to consider revising it.
> right. your customers pay you to get them the packets they asked for and if
> they want to visit my site and see my content and your cache breaks that,
> you're not delivering what your customers requested. My site won't deliver
> content in most of the pages without the ads displaying.
Not having a site that is cache friendly is the equivalent of
not having a site that works with Netscape|IE|etc. I don't see how your
content is the responsibility of anyone else but you.
> At the moment there is a timeout built in while I wait for the ad network
> to increase server capacity to meet demand.
> It will go away.
Ahh, so your page is disgustingly slow, and you want to keep it
that way.
--msa
