[Nottingham] Hosting your own domain/s?

[Robert Postill]

--=-kh2nlzLoi/J2GE6WueiL
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 11:50, Robert Davies wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 Jul 2003 11:17, Alex Herington wrote:
>=20
> > Maybe this is slightly off topic, but this is why I think projects like
> > 'Naan' are so awesome :) If access to bandwidth was 'clustered'
> > geographically, i.e. a wireless LAN in each city then maybe link the ci=
ties
> > by fibre, and have maybe some web proxies per city (or WLAN), that'd be
> > ideal. It'd even be viable to do this via the government and pay for it
> > through a 'broadband tax' or something. I just think it's a waste when,=
 if
> > I want to access a website in Nottingham, it's likely I'll be routed vi=
a
> > some backbone located in London (which is probably congested). It would=
 be
> > interesting to find out how much Internet traffic (for an average home =
or
> > business user) is limited to one city as opposed to the rest of the cou=
ntry
> > and international traffic. Just random thoughts :)
It certainly would be interesting to see the Naan figures after a couple
of months, I suspect what they'd say is that people will spend less time
contacting each other locally and more time going to their fave sites
like bbc.co.uk or slashdot.org.  In which case you're back where you
started in that tragedy of the commons situation.
>=20
> To do this effectively, you will need some Kick Ass routers, and unfortun=
ately=20
> BGP relies on non-automatic Administrative policies, about where traffic =
goes=20
> so you end up needing some professional to keep an eye on them.
There are alternatives to BGP but granted, you're going to need a lot of
synchronised routers.
> The web traffic you mentioned is alleviated by the transparent proxies, s=
o=20
> disliked by many when they turn out not to be so invisible in the real wo=
rld. =20
> It's one reason it's more efficient to use HTTP to provide file downloads=
=20
> than anon ftp, you get the benefit of proxy caching as well as a more=20
> lightweight protocol.
Ah, well I have used tools like cisco localdirector before and my take
is that if you get hold of the sites you're caching like slashdot and
say look we've noticed a lot of traffic and we'd like to cache some of
your content then I suspect they may have some helpful suggestions to
keep your caching solution low-key.  What we really require is some onus
on sites to say "OK we'll help you cache and therefore keep your traffic
local", that would be an everybody wins situation NTL keep their pipes
relatively well utilised, the sites know where their content is and the
punters get their info.  If NTL turned round to Naan and said, here have
some cache appliances I can see them saving themselves a pretty penny
over the lifespan of such a project.

Now all I need is a lamp with a Genie in :)
Robert.

Robert Postill
robert@grinning-cat.com
Tel:07968 801326

--=-kh2nlzLoi/J2GE6WueiL
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/CrsNIHzIG0PBILIRAnwrAJ9lk65IpSzTw5aHUV4tKUYbKpg5OACfRqaq
Oan89SUfh/5XM6ft472jmnQ=
=2qQz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-kh2nlzLoi/J2GE6WueiL--