Comments on: Dan Rayburn is mistaken in dismissing AT&T as a Content Delivery Network. http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/ Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:24:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Dan Rayburn http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-561 Dan Rayburn Thu, 29 Jan 2009 04:14:39 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-561 It's been fourteen months since I wrote that post and in that time frame, what has AT&T done in the CDN market? I think my point is proven. It’s been fourteen months since I wrote that post and in that time frame, what has AT&T done in the CDN market? I think my point is proven.

]]> By: Nick http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-49 Nick Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:14:09 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-49 Pete, Besides AT&T i know that some top Ts are also planning to build their own CDN.After these top telcos' enter into this market,what do you think of the CDN market future will be? another question is, does IPTV system needs those kind of CDN architecture? thanks Pete,

Besides AT&T i know that some top Ts are also planning to build their own CDN.After these top telcos’ enter into this market,what do you think of the CDN market future will be?

another question is, does IPTV system needs those kind of CDN architecture?

thanks

]]> By: pmountanos http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-48 pmountanos Thu, 17 Apr 2008 04:24:55 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-48 Nick, I never said that AT&T would have better delivery than Akamai. Nor do they necessarily have to be better in order to be successful. In the case of streaming or large file download they just have to deliver faster than a client can effectively use. The market for CDN services is big enough for multiple providers. Clearly any market with multiple vendors has a "best" but there is no reason that other providers can't be successful. Take a look at overnight delivery, credit card processing, banking, servers, tattoo shops... the list goes on. Obviously things like app acceleration have different requirements. Nick,
I never said that AT&T would have better delivery than Akamai. Nor do they necessarily have to be better in order to be successful. In the case of streaming or large file download they just have to deliver faster than a client can effectively use. The market for CDN services is big enough for multiple providers. Clearly any market with multiple vendors has a “best” but there is no reason that other providers can’t be successful. Take a look at overnight delivery, credit card processing, banking, servers, tattoo shops… the list goes on. Obviously things like app acceleration have different requirements.

]]> By: Nick http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-47 Nick Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:52:12 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-47 Pete, For the content delivery outside the AT&T's network, do you mean place streaming servers at the AT&T side of the peer connection with other telco's network? In that case,the quality can not be better than AKAMAI,cus they put servers in telco's network even they are on the top. Pete,

For the content delivery outside the AT&T’s network, do you mean place streaming servers at the AT&T side of the peer connection with other telco’s network? In that case,the quality can not be better than AKAMAI,cus they put servers in telco’s network even they are on the top.

]]> By: pmountanos http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-7 pmountanos Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:34:08 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-7 Abe, Your comment in Dan's blog was the reason for my reference to the fact that AT&T has extensive peering arraingments. AT&T doesn't need to put servers inside other networks. Traffic from their servers will flow to endpoints that are on other networks via these peering arrangements. These peering points are distributed around the country with multiple connections to many different networks. In AT&T's case their peering capacity totals 100's of Gbps. This is a core tenant to how traffic flows on the internet. In the case of streaming, RTT and packet loss are important factors in performance to end users. AT&T manages their native network and peering to reduce those metrics. As I said in my post AT&T has been doing this successfully for years. All CDN's rely on the peering of their network providers to some extent. Level 3 is another example of a company that is essentially a core backbone provider utilizing their peering to provide CDN services. Much of content delivered by Akamai will also flow over peering points. Abe,
Your comment in Dan’s blog was the reason for my reference to the fact that AT&T has extensive peering arraingments. AT&T doesn’t need to put servers inside other networks. Traffic from their servers will flow to endpoints that are on other networks via these peering arrangements. These peering points are distributed around the country with multiple connections to many different networks. In AT&T’s case their peering capacity totals 100’s of Gbps. This is a core tenant to how traffic flows on the internet. In the case of streaming, RTT and packet loss are important factors in performance to end users. AT&T manages their native network and peering to reduce those metrics. As I said in my post AT&T has been doing this successfully for years. All CDN’s rely on the peering of their network providers to some extent. Level 3 is another example of a company that is essentially a core backbone provider utilizing their peering to provide CDN services. Much of content delivered by Akamai will also flow over peering points.

]]> By: abe http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-6 abe Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:47:40 +0000 http://www.mumblemouth.com/2007/12/content-delivery/dan-rayburn-is-wrong-about-att-and-akamai/#comment-6 Pete, I will ask the same question I asked in Dan's blog: How can AT&T manage to place servers in non-AT&T networks as Akamai does? I believe this is an important/necessary feature of any effective CDN architecture. AT&T can definitely put content physically close to end-users within their own network, but I suspect this will not be readily allowed in competing networks. Pete,

I will ask the same question I asked in Dan’s blog: How can AT&T manage to place servers in non-AT&T networks as Akamai does? I believe this is an important/necessary feature of any effective CDN architecture.

AT&T can definitely put content physically close to end-users within their own network, but I suspect this will not be readily allowed in competing networks.

]]>