On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Mark Tinka <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Saturday, August 14, 2010 09:34:43 am Muwonge Ronald > wrote: > > > 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" > > ;-). > > When this issue initially surfaced several weeks back, I did > mention that neither UTL nor MTN had the incentive to make > this GGC freely available. > > That said, even though Google say the GGC should be > universally available within the country, regardless of the > host, they also did mention that models where some kind of > compensation for the GGC's availability, in other regions, > were developed by local interests. > Very true and again GGC is designed and run by Google for the others that need what is involved *Servers* GGC runs on rack mountable servers 4-6 in each cluster Each server provides back-up to others in a cluster Deployment in ISP networks that have substantial traffic to Google and are interested in saving BW Needs o rack space 8-12 RU o power ~ at 1800-2700W o IPs and Ethernet ports How does GCC work? "User resolves content_host.google.com. (example only) *If the ISP DNS doesn’t already know the IP address, it queries Google DNS for the IP address of content_host.google.com.** Google DNS server knows that this ISP has a Google Global Cache node that should be able to service the request, so it replies with that IP address. IP address is returned to the user.* If really Google loves the small users "we" would already be using the GCC but they don't....may be for now The user requests the desired content from the IP address, which happens to be a GGC node on their ISP’s network instead of a server on the Google network. If the content is cacheable and not already on the GGC node, it requests the content from Google on behalf of the user and caches it for future requests. Once the GGC node has the content, it can serve it to the requesting user as well as subsequent users looking for the same content. Key is to select Google server in close proximity to the requesting client Most CDN systems today use the DNS to make such server selection decisions. However, DNS provides only the IP address of the client's local DNS server to the CDN, and not the user's IP address. Implicit assumption that clients are close to their local DNS servers could lead to suboptimal node selections The only way to improve the situation is to ensure that users point to right resolvers IP-2-GEO techniques used to make sure that DNS IP and user IP map to proper geography where node is located GGC gives control to ISPs by collecting IP prefixes using BGP from ISPs hosting GGC - to determine which users should be served by a given node. Proxy mode: GGC pre-establishes connections to Google back ends, terminates user TCP session locally and is capable of caching static content. Significant speed improvements over the high latency links due to the elimination of at least 3 rrt (syn/syn-ack/ack) and reducing server time-outs. > > If UTL and MTN think it is unrealistic for them to make the > GGC freely available, then propose a method they might find > reasonable - Google moving the GGC elsewhere being absent. > The GGC is owned by Google and they know where they love it to be placed "business wise".If I borrow a subject from the Science of internet traffic ,always reduce traffic from the origin.MTN and UTL are the biggest source of Google's uplink traffic from Uganda making them fit for the colocations.If any ISP can do 5mb+ to Google then "they" will get one for now Google saves 10Mb+ uplink traffic and transit costs they don't care about what small ISP's in Africa save besides Science says survival for the fittest and sadly it wont change. > > > 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 ;-) > > The GGC is meant to bring Google content closer to the user. > The benefits are mutual. > The main objective Google has been deploying banks of servers allover those same networks, so traffic to Google’s servers never has to leave these ISP's cutting down on lag time and transit costs. Then may be the above point is the last one on their agenda I think if we all know how GCC works and the motive of the search Giant I think am on their side and I won't change that and I wouldn't even be mad at MTN or UTL the cluster is run and Google themselves who did a right thing techinically.For the small ISP's who want to use the GCC please talkt to MTN and UTL just because they are bigger than "you".in everything thing. Regards Ronny > 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. ---------------------------------------
