[AusNOG] IP Transit provider Caching content providers with their own ASN and IP's

[Bruce Forster]

>From my perspective;

1, You do have a commercial relationship with your upstream not the CDN
2, its in the interest of the upstream to save on costs with the use of
cache's on net and other IX's
3, the 'best' path for your network and what the CDN views as best don't
always align.

I know in the past iv had issues with CDN's and the path traffic takes,
Gavins right open a case with the CDN and see what they say my thoughts
will be a reply along the lines of "everything working as expected"



On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 4:53 PM thomas bishop <darryl.huges87 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi List,
>
> This is a bit of a strange one.
>
> We have recently signed up with a new IP Transit provider and noticed the
> usage was a lot higher than our old provider.
>
> After doing some digging and sflow captures we managed to find out the
> provider themselves was sending us tonnes of traffic from their ASN and
> their IP (They are not a content provider).
>
> We raised this with the provider and they said its because they cache
> akami and a few other content providers so that traffic will come through
> our Transit link instead of our peering.
>
> Since the traffic is coming straight from their AS there is little we can
> do to stop it coming in apart from getting our own caching server but i
> don't feel like this should be required.
>
> Curious of your thoughts either on list or privately. Personally i don't
> see why they would cache with their own AS number. We are essentially
> paying a premium for traffic we can get for nothing with peering.
>
> Thanks
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>


-- 
Regards,

Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20190703/6cbd50e0/attachment.html>