Unfortunately, caching servers break a lot of sites' content
unintentionally.  That is, they have to request a page from the requested
site as if it were the exact same configuration (same browser, same OS, same
plug-ins, etc., as the requestor) and then relay it to the requesting
subscriber as if it were the destination site knowing that same information.


Also, they add significant latency to ordinary traffic (the requested URLs
have to be obtained in their entirety first then relayed) and you can't have
more than a thousand up to several thousand simultaneous users...maybe not a
problem... you can get around that with load balancing in the NOCs with
multiple proxy servers.

I'd be interested in learning of any well-performing installations in
broadband.  I'd be especially interested in learning if the heavy traffic
users (P2P?) ever loaded a page that was on a regular site to inflict heavy
traffic.

. . . j o n a t h a n

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 12:49 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] bits per mbps

Back in the olden days of dialup, I used to get fantastic results from 
our caching server.  It was just a PIII machine with a whopping 640meg 
of memory, but it did a good job.  Page views were noticeably faster 
when things were setup correctly.

When I was in a backbone pinch, I used a caching server fed by a cable 
modem to offload a large percentage of my web surfing traffic.  Worked 
fine until Charter's upload degraded so bad that external webmail 
(hotmail, yahoo) quit working.  Got our fiber backbone installed at that 
time and didn't need it after that, but it did the job in a pinch.

It is actually fairly simple to get a caching server running nowadays, 
compared to what we used to have to go through.  CentOS seems to have a 
pretty decent squid caching server implementation in the install list 
ready to run.   Once you get your localnets in the ACL list and make a 
few tweaks, it is off and running and ready for production.   With 
servers so cheap, I am thinking about building one with 2 or 4gig of 
memory and setting it up to cache big objects (YouTube videos, Yahoo 
videos, 5meg objects, etc) and forcing all of my residential customers 
that are on private IP ranges to go through it.   My connection is 
unmetered, so I don't really save that much by doing it as far as 
bandwidth consumption goes, but I'm up to 18-19meg at peak times on my 
20 meg connection, so it might buy me a few months before I have to add 
capacity.

Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


George Rogato wrote:
>
>
> Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>
>> FYI, that is NOT how things worked with my Cobalt CacheRAQ.  It was 
>> amazing how quickly things snapped up on the page with it vs. without 
>> it.  Too bad it was an older unit and I could only use it by changing 
>> the gateway addresses.  And it had heat related lockup issues in the 
>> summer.
>>
>> I'd love to put another one in.  It was money very well spent.
>>
>
>
> Funny how fast time goes by, now that you mentioned it, We had a 
> cacheRAQ as well.
>
> You know Akamai is also an option. As I recall they require you to 
> have x number of subs and then send you their boxes to be set up on 
> your network. All free.
>
> For your final solution on how do you allow subs to download more bits 
> and not raise your upstream cost, the solution is all pretty simple 
> with what you have in place right now.
>
> You mentioned that Butch was your guy.
>
> Seeing Butch is your guy, I am assuming you have a MT box at your noc. 
> Best solution is to do some bandwidth rules limiting your netowrk to 
> never go more than x megs and to make your users burst or fall back.
>
> I would still consider a caching server to handle the videos just the 
> same. That ought to shave something.
>
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006
12:23 PM
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006
12:23 PM
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to