>> I'd argue that's just content (though admittedly a lot of it). "just static content" would be more accurate ...
>I would further argue that you can't cache active Web content, like >bank account statements, utility billing, help desk request/responses, >equipment status, and other things that change constantly. There were many attempts at this by Johhny-cum-lately ISPs back in the 90's -- particularly Telco and Cableco's -- with their "transparent poxies". Eventually they discovered that it was more cost efficient to actually provide the customer with what the customer had purchased. --- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume. >-----Original Message----- >From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Stephen >Satchell >Sent: Wednesday, 21 November, 2018 20:45 >To: nanog@nanog.org >Subject: Re: Internet diameter? > >On 11/21/2018 07:32 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote:
