Speaking as a (very) small operator, we've also been seeing less and
less of our Akamai traffic coming to us over peering over the last
couple years. I've reached out to Akamai NOC as well as Jared directly
on a few occasions and while they've been helpful and their changes
usually have some short-term impact, the balance has always shifted back
some weeks/months later. I've more or less resigned myself to this being
how Akamai wants things, and as we so often have to as small fish, just
dealing with it.
We're currently seeing about 80% of our AS20940 origin traffic coming
from transit, and I'm certain there's a significant additional amount
which is difficult to identify coming from on-net caches at our upstream
providers (though it appears from the thread that may be reducing as
well). Only about 20% is coming from peering where we have significantly
more capacity and lower costs. Whatever the algorithm is doing, from my
perspective it doesn't make a lot of sense and is pretty frustrating,
and I'm somewhat concerned about busting commits and possibly running
into congestion for the next big event that does hit us, which would not
be a problem if it were delivered over peering.
Luckily we're business focussed, so we're not getting hit by these
gaming events.
Keenan Tims
Stargate Connections Inc (AS19171)
On 2019-12-06 8:13 a.m., Jared Mauch wrote:
On Dec 6, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Chris Adams <c...@cmadams.net> wrote:
Once upon a time, Fawcett, Nick <nfawc...@corp.mtco.com> said:
We had three onsite Akamai caches a few months ago. They called us up and said
they are removing that service and sent us boxes to pack up the hardware and
ship back. We’ve had quite the increase in DIA traffic as a result of it.
Same here. We'd had Akamai servers for many years, replaced as needed
(including one failed servre replaced right before they turned them
off). Now about 50% of our Akamai traffic comes across transit links,
not peering. This seems like it would be rather inefficient for them
too…
There’s an element of scale when it comes to certain content that makes it not
viable if the majority of traffic is VOD with variable bitrates it requires a
lot more capital.
Things like downloads of software updates (eg: patch Tuesday) lend themselves
to different optimizations. The hardware has a cost as well as the bandwidth
as well.
I’ll say that most places that have a few servers may only see a minor
improvement in their in:out. If you’re not peering with us or are and see
significant traffic via transit, please do reach out.
I’m happy to discuss in private or at any NANOG/IETF meeting people are at. We
generally have someone at most of the other NOG meetings as well, including
RIPE, APRICOT and even GPF etc.
I am personally always looking for better ways to serve the medium (or small)
size providers better.
- Jared
