"IP networks will feel traffic pain in 2009" (C|Net & Cisco)

Wed Jan 21 21:30:36 UTC 2009

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