how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
| reply to yt
Re: Karl, you have any guess said by yt:said by noname10:You're not mentioning the fact that content from Akamai, Google, or Limelight is cheaper for the ISP as well. Google and Limelight peer with most ISP which cuts out transit costs for both the content provider (google and Limelight) and the ISP. ....The direct peering takes out an unnecessary middle man and saves both parties money. This is a myth used to (temporarily) justify this model. No you are wrong. It is not a Myth it is a fact. Your entire argument is a fallacy.
Think about this logic here. I say peering saves the ISP's money, and you say that is a myth based on the savings being small? In fact your argument against me supported my position not yours. | |
4 edits | said by noname10:Think about this logic here. I say peering saves the ISP's money, and you say that is a myth based on the savings being small? In fact your argument against me supported my position not yours. Let me try and clarify it.
• The small (temporary) savings are for some ISPs for the existing traffic.
• Or.. the traffic may already be traversing a peer of that ISP and while the CDN is, and should, be paying for use of a network, it doesn't save the ISP any transit costs. Peers have a balance of trade where either party carries relatively equal load/equal distance of the other parties traffic. (hence the peering relationship vs transit)
• There is a end to end cost of traffic that has first mile, core, metro and last mile. The most expensive part of the network is as it gets close to the user. The metro and access.
• While a CDN may (and I stress may) cut out some national costs, allowing UNLIMITED FREE traffic without any network growth recover costs takes the existing (temporary) savings of not paying transit and 10x, 100x the amount of content that can be sent at no incremental cost.
This in turn takes that temporary transit savings (small piece of the $$ pie) and enables unfunded exponential growth requiring large capital outlay on the metro and last mile.
Most all content is consolidating behind 3 players and companies like the one you work for are pushing for no more network costs (for them). This dismantles existing Internet economics and pushes all network costs to the consumers.
Pure and simple: Free peering should be with peers that have an equal network cost burden of carrying traffic. 10 meters vs 1000 KM is not equal network cost burden. Consumers should not be the only ones paying for the growth of Internet traffic. | |
|
