On 8/13/10, Mark Tinka <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2010 04:06:51 pm Muwonge Ronald wrote:
>
>> They can't  be pulled both parties benefit for it and
>> trust me google benefits more :-)
>
> Oh, they would be pulled.
>
> I have it on good authority that Google aren't in the habit
> of appearing to favour larger players over others, since
> their intention is to reach as many eye-balls as they can.

Then they should pay MTN and UTL for the bandwidth if they need us to
use the facility.By the way rumors say that's the only reason stopping
this "money involved" ;-).
Secondly,though  hosted in Ug territory these nodes don't have "local
content" but cuts on Googles costs for requests sent to their Google
Modular Data Centers (beating the IX's objective remember?) 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 ;-)
>
> If that isn't happening, they'll turn it off. However, it'll
> be logistically easier for folk hosting the GGC's to find a
> way to keep them running.
>
> The way forward now is for all other ISP's to figure out a
> model with UTL and MTN.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.
>
_______________________________________________
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.
---------------------------------------

Reply via email to