[Tfug] Web server names

[Zack Williams]

> But, if *simply* a WWW caching service, then it could/would
> (conceivably) cache *all* WWW requests that clients of that
> ISP make, right?  I.e., why does ISP want to invest in a
> bit of kit aimed *solely* at netflix customers (that it happens
> to serve) if it doesn't also buy them something for themselves?

CDN's are far from general caches.  They tend to be ultra specific.

For example, many have the ability to "prime the pump" - lets say that
a large company was going to release a large new software update.
They'd give it to the CDN to propagate geographically in advance,
before anyone requested it from the cache, so it would be ready and a
faster download, rather than having their download servers get crushed
by demand.

There are also some interesting examples of this - Apple has their
WWDC conference for developers, and they put CDN servers on site - you
can go down to the cafeteria, hook into gigabit ethernet, and download
the multi-gig installers and software development packages as fast as
your hardware will allow.

> {Of course, if Netflix is *the* big bandwidth hog at the ISP,
> then it cuts down on the ISP's upstream traffic.  OTOH, if HULU,
> etc. are also utilizing lots of ISP bandwidth, then the ISP
> would want that box to also cache *those* requests.  I suspect
> ISP's would quickly tire of each new content provider pressuring
> them to add Yet Another Box *just* for their needs).

Exactly - thus Netflix's "To get our Super HD, your ISP needs to
cooperate" push on customers.

> I guess the question I am asking is:  Does this box look like
> GENERAL local cache for the ISP?  Or, "remote" cache (wrt Netflix)
> for the "foreign" service?

The latter.

- Zack