 |
 |
I doubt Akamai will use them evenly. Akamai will toss traffic wherever it is most advantageous to Akamai. They will not likely saturate anyone's network (after all, that's also counter-productive for their own goals in most cases). Owen On Apr 13, 2011, at 7:38 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > If three carriers participated by providing transit, how would Akamai use the transit links evenly, either between transit links or participating carriers? > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jay Hanke > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 10:35 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Akamai Peering > > If I placed one of the smaller Akamai clusters in 511, would carriers > be interested in peering with the condition that they provide > transport to "feed" the cluster? > > The idea would be that carriers using the cluster would share in the > costs. So Carrier A would peer over MICE a router in front of the > cluster with the agreement that they advertise the cluster IP > addresses to the Internet. Carrier B would do the same thing. > > Jay > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1