[Tfug] Web server names

[Bexley Hall]

Hi Zack,

On 1/22/2013 6:22 PM, Zack Williams wrote:
>> 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.

So, the gamble Netflix takes is they risk *losing* a subscriber
if the subscriber's ISP doesn't buy into their scheme.  They are
obviously hoping the ISP will bow to the pressure of *many* of
their subscribers requesting this capability.

Of course, the ISP can take another approach:  charge for a "premium
service" -- potentially blocking folks who *don't* pay for the
service from using Netflix (?)

[In which case, Netflix sees customers complaining because of
the 'surcharge" for Netflix access]

Also have to wonder how some NATIONAL ISP handles this:  "we bought
*one* box (which is a drop in the bucket when it comes to supporting
our millions of users), so now you (Netflix) have to provide them
with this service..."

>> 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.

Interesting to see how this shakes out!

Thx!
--don