On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Mike Barnard <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Muwonge Ronald <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 ;-) >> > > technical challenges may be, costs... I don't think so. We recently tried > to work out a few things with the bandwidth we were consuming in the office > and what a cache would save us. > > Based on our calculations and consideration of a cache server that caches > data more or less like the GGC does, we actually save 75% of our office > bandwidth by utilising the cache. If you took into consideration that you > would save 35% of your downlink bandwidth and 35% of your uplink bandwidth, > I think it follow that you benefit more than Google would, since, all their > data is offered to the end users for free. > Mike I get how that "squid" cache works but GCC isn't for that.It's here for Google not us mate.They want to cust their costs not for the small ISP's > The small ISP's can us the above description of caching to save and "I > believe that's why I understand" the above calculations as I use them too > > Ronnie, run netflow on your router that directly peers with your uplink, > analyse this data and find out how much of that traffic is youtube, google > and Google related sites. > Am with you on this mate and believe this fact and these days add on redtubetraffic :-) must be above 18yrs pliz > > > Let Google give it to us and we'll do all to ensure it gets through the IX, > no strings attached. > When we are ready they will come to us or you will just find yourself going via those nodes > > > Regards > Ronny > > -- > Mike > > Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one in > a million chances happen 99% of the time. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > --------------------------------------- > > >
_______________________________________________ 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. ---------------------------------------
