Re: Suggestion

From: Alex Rousskov <>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 21:52:29 -0600 (CST)

On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Dancer wrote:

> Indeed, our cache wasn't even half-full, but we're talking $560(AUS) [$430(US)] to
> get it filled to the point it was when it spontaneously combusted, and it's effect on
> our daily bandwidth expenses is noticeable. We can expect to pay much more per day
> (slowly diminishing) for the next couple weeks, at least. Within three to four weeks,
> we should be stable again, costwise.

Interesting figures!

Is it _theoretically_ possible to have an agreement with other _local_
caches to exchange cached data in case of crashes (or even periodically)?
Looks like it could save you a lot of money.

I understand that your neighbors are your competitors, but it is probably
fearly easy to establish a fair trade with them (e.g., to keep a record of
total volume of borrowed/loaned MBs of fresh objects??). It seems to be
quite feasible to support such a "trade" in Squid...

The same trade can be used by "edu" caches as well, I guess.

Just a thought.


P.S. Do you pay per peak bandwidth or per byte?
Received on Tue Dec 09 1997 - 19:55:32 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:37:53 MST