While I would agree with that, having peering helps but certainly doesn't replace a localized CDN. Certainly better than nothing though. It also of course depends on the size of your network. If you are paying to carry that traffic (leased backhaul, etc.) from your peering point to your customers, you are still paying the same amount to deliver that content to your users (excluding any transit savings if moving from transit to get that CDN content). That is where an on-net CDN really saves you significantly as you can bury it deep into your network. I can't speak specifics here but I can tell you that the CDNs we have are filled at off-peak, so it really does become a win-win from a technical perspective (business case and politics are a completely different conversation though).
-Jeff On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:50 AM, Simon Lockhart <si...@slimey.org> wrote: > On Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 02:03:54PM +0000, Kyle Camilleri wrote: >> Does anybody know of any other CDN providers that offer similar caches? > > Most CDN providers also provide free access to "super node" caches at major > datacentres and peering points - depending on where you are located, which > datacentres you're in, and what your network looks like, you may find that > it's > cheaper for you to interconnect with the CDNs within a datacentre > (particularly > if you can do it via an IX), than the provide space and power for CDN nodes > within your own network. > > Simon >
