On Saturday, August 14, 2010 09:34:43 am Muwonge Ronald wrote: > Then they should pay MTN and UTL for the bandwidth if > they need us to use the facility.By the way rumors say > that's the only reason stopping this "money involved" > ;-).
When this issue initially surfaced several weeks back, I did mention that neither UTL nor MTN had the incentive to make this GGC freely available. That said, even though Google say the GGC should be universally available within the country, regardless of the host, they also did mention that models where some kind of compensation for the GGC's availability, in other regions, were developed by local interests. If UTL and MTN think it is unrealistic for them to make the GGC freely available, then propose a method they might find reasonable - Google moving the GGC elsewhere being absent. > Secondly,though hosted in Ug territory these nodes don't > have "local content" but cuts on Googles costs for > requests sent to their Google Modular Data Centers > (beating the IX's objective remember?) I understand MTN > and UTL business wise but technically lets test the > thing as they finalize the money thing putting in mind > the content isn't local people ;-) The GGC is meant to bring Google content closer to the user. The benefits are mutual. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
