RE: Query re request routing

["Reinaldo Penno" <rpenno@nortelnetworks.com>]

Hi Phil,

comments inline
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Rzewski [mailto:philr@inktomi.com]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 10:16 PM
To: Reinaldo Penno
Cc: cdn
Subject: RE: Query re request routing


In an attempt to be clear, I'll name names. I am an @Home cable modem
subscriber. They have HTTP proxies in every cable head end. When they
signed me up as a new subscriber, they gave me the IP address of the
caching proxy in my local head end so they could own my first content hop
for HTTP. If they enable their caching proxies for CDI, they effectively
become an Access Content Network for their users who point at them (they
assume all their customers do, since installers typically modify client
browser configs when they install the modems). If you choose not to point
at the proxies, then a nearby CDN surrogate may be your first content hop,
but only when you're accessing sites that are affiliated with that CDN.
That the difference in a nutshell: As my ACN for HTTP, @Home delivers all
HTTP content to me from that local avatar. As far as I can tell, no CDN can
technically stop that from happening.

I agree with you, technically is very difficult to stop that. On the other
hand , in countries where open access is more ubiquitious is it possible
that @home wouldn't be even allowed give the IP address to the PC and
couldn't own the first hop (never), because it does not own the user. There
are all kind of legislations out there. This particularly true in south
america where cable open access is big.  So, IMO we should (as said below)
really separate the access provider from the content or service provider in
the definitions.


>In other words, in a brodband access network if you are a subscriber of ISP
>A, you will redirected to ISP A surrogates, midia caches and application
>server sitting or not within the ACN premises or to a set of caches owned
by
>the ACN and shared by all ISPs and ASPs.
I guess this is a reason why it's important to get terminology straight,
and I hope I'm not making things worse by trying to introduce these new
terms. I think I see the point you're trying to make. If by "broadband
access network" you're thinking of someone like a DSL provider that is
mapping layer 2 VCs into various layer 3 ISPs, then sure, each ISP may very
well have their own avatars. By my definition, those ISPs are therefore
ACNs. If the word "Access" in ACN is a bad word because it makes people
think more of the layer 2/3 mappings such as for DSL, then I need to make a
new term.

yes, the word access is confusing , we should align our terminology to that
which is already in use in broadband networks.

thanks,

Reinaldo