>and if UTL is making money out of this, then why did it take anyone 3 years to >implement?
I prefer the use of saving money - as for instance orange will be paying X - less the 27m x 250 USD I think not implementing a cache had alot to do with ignorance....Because Google has been letting people hosting caches for a while now. Overall i think this is a good indicator....I have comparative graph from 8 months ago. Uixp vs Kixp in a presentation (Pg 6) http://eaigf.or.ke/files/eaigf2010/Broadband_challenges_and_achievements_%20Douglas_Onyango.pdf Regards, Douglas Onyango | +256(0712)981329 Life is the educators practical joke in which you spend the first half learning, and the second half learning that everything you learned in the first was wrong. --- On Tue, 1/18/11, Reinier Battenberg <[email protected]> wrote: From: Reinier Battenberg <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LUG] Donating servers.. where? To: "Uganda Linux User Group" <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2011, 11:35 AM #yiv1737145886 p, #yiv1737145886 li {white-space:pre-wrap;} and if UTL is making money out of this, then why did it take anyone 3 years to implement? -- rgds, Reinier Battenberg Director Mountbatten Ltd. +256 758 801 749 www.mountbatten.net On Tuesday 18 January 2011 11:28:40 Reinier Battenberg wrote: > AFAIK, they dont. The deal with the Google cache is that you may host it, > and you then are obliged to give other peers in your country free access. > That is why the MTN cache is slightly different (because of the sms stuff > they also had going) and MTN never gave anyone access to their cache. > Its probably also the reason why it took 3 years to have the first ISP use > the UIXP to get access to a cache. > > > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Reinier Battenberg > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > UIXP traffic is free (AFAIK), and Orange is selling it to their clients > > > at 250USD/Mbs at least to their clients. > > > > I see what you mean now. However, it's not as cut and dried as that. > > They pay someone (or multiple someones) for transit. that's not free. > > The fact that they are getting ~30 Mbps from the GGC means that this > > traffic will be delivered faster to their customers than from transit > > links. It doesn't mean that they are paying for 30Mb/s less transit > > however. It's just 30Mbps less transit than they are using. Make > > sense? -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ The Uganda Linux User Group: http://linux.or.ug Send messages to this mailing list by addressing e-mails to: [email protected] Mailing list archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Mailing list settings: http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug To unsubscribe: http://kym.net/mailman/options/lug The Uganda LUG mailing list is generously hosted by INFOCOM: http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The mailing list host is not responsible for them in any way. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________ The Uganda Linux User Group: http://linux.or.ug Send messages to this mailing list by addressing e-mails to: [email protected] Mailing list archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Mailing list settings: http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug To unsubscribe: http://kym.net/mailman/options/lug The Uganda LUG mailing list is generously hosted by INFOCOM: http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The mailing list host is not responsible for them in any way.
