> > Does Akamai bear some burden here to make these rollouts less troublesome > for the ISPs they traverse through the last mile(s)? IMO yes, yes they do. > When you're doing something new and unprecedented, as Akamai frequently > brags about on Twitter, like having rapid, bursty growth of traffic, you > need to consider that just because you can generate it, doesn't mean it can > be delivered. >
Akamai, and other CDNs, do not **generate** traffic ; they serve the requests generated by users. On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:54 PM Matt Erculiani <merculi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Niels, > > I think to clarify Jean's point, when you buy a 300mbps circuit, you're > paying for 300mbps of *internet *access. > > That does not mean that a network should (and in this case small-medium > ones simply can't) build all of their capacity to service a large number of > customer circuits at line rate at the same time for an extended > period, ESPECIALLY to the exact same endpoint. It's just not economically > reasonable to expect that. Remember we're talking about residential service > here, not enterprise circuits. > > Therefore, how do you prevent this spike of [insert large number here] > gigabits traversing the network at the same time from causing issues? Build > more network? That sounds easy, but there are plenty of legitimate reasons > why ISPs can't or don't want to do that, particularly for an event that > only occurs once per quarter or so. > > Does Akamai bear some burden here to make these rollouts less troublesome > for the ISPs they traverse through the last mile(s)? IMO yes, yes they do. > When you're doing something new and unprecedented, as Akamai frequently > brags about on Twitter, like having rapid, bursty growth of traffic, you > need to consider that just because you can generate it, doesn't mean it can > be delivered. They've gotta be more sophisticated than a bunch of servers > with SSD arrays, ramdisks, and 100 gig interfaces, so there's no excuse for > them here to just blindly fill every link they have after sitting idle for > weeks/months at a time and expect everything to come out alright and nobody > to complain about it. > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 1:21 PM Niels Bakker <niels=na...@bakker.net> > wrote: > >> * nanog@nanog.org (Jean St-Laurent via NANOG) [Thu 01 Apr 2021, 21:03 >> CEST]: >> >An artificial roll out penalty somehow? Probably not at the ISP >> >level, but more at the game level. Well, ISP could also have some >> >mechanisms to reduce the impact or even Akamai could force a >> >progressive roll out. >> >> It's an online game. You can't play the game with outdated assets. >> You'd not see walls where other players would, for example. >> >> What you're suggesting is the ability of ISPs to market Internet access >> at a certain speed but not have to deliver it based on conditions they >> create. >> >> >> -- Niels. >> > > > -- > Matt Erculiani > ERCUL-ARIN >