Re: Elephant in the room - Akamai

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

> On Dec 6, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Chris Adams <cma () cmadams net> wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Fawcett, Nick <nfawcett () corp mtco com> said:
> > We had three onsite Akamai caches a few months ago.  They called us up and said they are removing that service and 
> > sent us boxes to pack up the hardware and ship back.  We’ve had quite the increase in DIA traffic as a result of it.
>
> Same here.  We'd had Akamai servers for many years, replaced as needed
> (including one failed servre replaced right before they turned them
> off).  Now about 50% of our Akamai traffic comes across transit links,
> not peering.  This seems like it would be rather inefficient for them
> too…

There’s an element of scale when it comes to certain content that makes it not viable if the majority of traffic is VOD 
with variable bitrates it requires a lot more capital.  

Things like downloads of software updates (eg: patch Tuesday) lend themselves to different optimizations.  The hardware 
has a cost as well as the bandwidth as well.

I’ll say that most places that have a few servers may only see a minor improvement in their in:out.  If you’re not 
peering with us or are and see significant traffic via transit, please do reach out.

I’m happy to discuss in private or at any NANOG/IETF meeting people are at.  We generally have someone at most of the 
other NOG meetings as well, including RIPE, APRICOT and even GPF etc.

I am personally always looking for better ways to serve the medium (or small) size providers better.

- Jared