[31800] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: decreased caching efficiency?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg A. Woods)
Fri Oct 20 16:04:51 2000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: woods@weird.com (Greg A. Woods)
To: "Dana Hudes" <dhudes@hudes.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu (North America Network Operators Group Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <014b01c03ab4$edb59ac0$3d5cdcd1@hudes.org>
Reply-To: woods@weird.com (Greg A. Woods)
Message-Id: <20001020195801.2F2984@proven.weird.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 15:58:01 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
[ On Friday, October 20, 2000 at 12:43:51 (-0400), Dana Hudes wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: decreased caching efficiency?
>
> Neither is being an ISP a guarantee of revenue.
Not if you're an idiot and can't measure input vs. output and figure out
how to charge more for what you deliver than what you buy from your
upstream, no; but if not well then you've got to work pretty hard *not*
to have good revenue, if not a profit too!
> I have a guarantee that if an ad displays my account is credited.
> Its contractual. Not even electronic contract, paper executed by both parties.
Cool. Good for you.
Now you need to learn just how to make sure that you can count those
display events. I suspect your attitude is doing more to prevent this
possiblity than to ensure it.
Are you really sure you want to be turning people away from the content
that they've sought out just because your banner advert spam blocks the
content until it's displayed?
Eg. if your medium were print would you really want all of the other
pages in the publication to appear blank before your advert was viewed?
Get Real! You'd be laughed out of town forever!
This is a stupid discussion, and not suitable for NANOG. Please take it
elsewhere!
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
