Yes, but the bandwidth savings are not worth the headaches (another
box or two to maintain, some sites don't like to be cached, customer
support calls, web sites blocking a certain IP address because ALL the
traffic from your network is coming from the cache server IP, etc.).
Unless you are paying a FORTUNE for bandwidth, it's not worth doing.
Travis
Microserv
On 9/1/2010 12:17 AM, Scott Carullo wrote:
Could a squid caching server accomplish the same sort of bandwidth
savings, maybe more due to the fact it is caching ALL the content not
just Akamai? I've never use used a web cahce always had the bandwidth
and the problems were not worth it
Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
