Google’s OpenEdge Could Dramatically Reduce Google’s Impact on the Internet’s Core

by on December 18, 2008 · 30 comments

On the Google Public Policy Blog, Richard Whitt’s response to the recent Wall Street Journal article (of now considerable infamy) fails to mention one of the primary benefits of Google’s OpenEdge caching program.  Whitt only mentions the following benefits:

By bringing YouTube videos and other content physically closer to end users, site operators can improve page load times for videos and Web pages. In addition, these solutions help broadband providers by minimizing the need to send traffic outside of their networks and reducing congestion on the Internet’s backbones.

What Whitt doesn’t say is that caching programs like Google’s have the potential to dramatically reduce the total traffic on tier one and tier two carriers (networks that peer, or exchange data without charge, with other networks).  But this traffic reduction is one of the biggest benefits Google’s program provides to the rest of the Net.

How would OpenEdge do this?  Let me explain using a bit of anecdotal evidence.

Running a trace route on “youtube.com” from my PC, I found that it takes 23 hops for me to get from the middle of Washington, DC to YouTube’s servers.  Out of those 23 hops, 7 are on Comcast routers.  Most of the other hops travel through Level3′s network, and Level3 is a  tier 1 carrier.

Let’s say 5000 people in DC watch the same YouTube video of a sleeping cat tonight. Under the current system, these 5000 videos careen their way over 23 hops, crossing the entire country and using up scarce bandwidth on a tier 1 carrier at the core of the Internet.

With caching, presumably that same movie of cats sleeping would only have to cross the country a few times before Google decided to cache it locally (or perhaps only once).   Once cached in the servers parked at one of Comcast’s facilities in the area, it would only have to make a few hops, and only through Comcast’s network.

This means Google’s OpenEdge program could reduce the amount of traffic Level3 and other tier one carriers have to shuttle across the country by orders of magnitude.  This model reduces core traffic even more for more popular videos, making it the perfect solution to moving broadcast-style video programming onto the net.

This also means that the average web user will have a much less congested Internet to deal with.

Additionally, small web businesses won’t have to put up with an Internet filled with sleeping cats.  This would give Google some edge over the little guy, but it also represents Google  paying to reduce its bandwidth use, making it easier for much smaller competitors to have a presence online.

So, is Google’s OpenEdge neutral? No one seems to know what that means anymore.

Does OpenEdge give Google a competitive advantage? Yes, having faster videos and other rich media content makes Google’s products much more desirable to consumers.  Presumably, smaller competitors will not be able to offer the same quality of service.

Does OpenEdge hurt the future of the Internet?  No, it improves it for everyone.

  • http://techvideoblog.com Charbax

    How about Google providing caching for small companies through them using Google App Engine APIs. Pricing for cache servers is higher for storage but much lower for bandwidth the more bandwidth you use. While pricing on normal un-cached servers is lower for storage and higher for bandwidth used.

  • http://www.cordblomquist.com cordblomquist

    Google could offer this service if it wanted to get into that business, but like the Google Policy Blog pointed out, this service is offered by many other companies already such as Akamai, Limelight, and Amazon's Cloudfront.

    I'm not sure, but Google seems to be the first company doing this sort of thing entirely in-house, rather than contracting to one of these other services.

    But you're right Charbox, cache storage prices are high, but cheaper than added bandwidth in many cases. It's up to individual companies to decide what will work better for their applications and thankfully options are already available.

  • http://techvideoblog.com Charbax

    Yup, and I believe Google has already said they plan to resell capacity on those cache servers, since Google will soon enable pricing for storage and bandwidth used for transfering of small and large files on Google App Engine. Thus Google provides that service as a cloud service, but they certainly will be using the cache servers to not only speed ping times but to save on bandwidth costs for the popular stuff. Those savings will probably be reflected in the storage and bandwidth pricing of Google App Engine.

  • http://www.cordblomquist.com cordblomquist

    Seems like we have another benefit of OpenEdge for small businesses. More good news.

  • http://www.rentecdirect.com Mr Landlord

    Time will tell I suppose, but generally Google follows the principle of “do no evil”. For the most part they are right on target with that. As with all Google products, and other products, I'm sure OpenEdge will have it's challenges and critics, but if it delivers content faster using less overall bandwidth, it's going to be a good thing. I just can't wait for it to mature so our companies can lease space on those caches. It wouldn't take much to be better than Akamai.

  • http://www.rentecdirect.com Mr Landlord

    Time will tell I suppose, but generally Google follows the principle of “do no evil”. For the most part they are right on target with that. As with all Google products, and other products, I'm sure OpenEdge will have it's challenges and critics, but if it delivers content faster using less overall bandwidth, it's going to be a good thing. I just can't wait for it to mature so our companies can lease space on those caches. It wouldn't take much to be better than Akamai.

  • Pingback: TPW 38: The Google Kerfuffle — Edge Caching & Net Neutrality - The Technology Liberation Front

  • http://www.rentecdirect.com Mr Landlord

    Time will tell I suppose, but generally Google follows the principle of “do no evil”. For the most part they are right on target with that. As with all Google products, and other products, I'm sure OpenEdge will have it's challenges and critics, but if it delivers content faster using less overall bandwidth, it's going to be a good thing. I just can't wait for it to mature so our companies can lease space on those caches. It wouldn't take much to be better than Akamai.

  • Pingback: Hey, Remember 2008′s Neutrality Debate?

  • Pingback: Larry Sudduth

  • Pingback: 1300 number

  • Pingback: cheap line phentermine

  • Pingback: Australian Derby

  • Pingback: DDOS Protected

  • Pingback: Reizen

  • Pingback: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--3e0FB_zls

  • Pingback: Get Rid of Herpes Review

  • Pingback: premier league malaysia

  • Pingback: garcinia cambogia, about garcinia cambogia, all natural garcinia cambogia, all natural garcinia cambogia extract, all natural weight loss, all natural weight loss supplement, amazon garcinia cambogia extract, amazon garcinia cambogia extract pure, appetit

  • Pingback: Trade Show Exhibit Displays

  • Pingback: prix de l'immobilier

  • Pingback: PALS Coupon Code

  • Pingback: Find Out More

  • Pingback: Modern Art For Sale

  • Pingback: http://www.youtube.com/user/AdvMedCertification

  • Pingback: need for speed

  • Pingback: simply click the following website page

  • Pingback: simply click the up coming document

  • Pingback: simply click the next web page

  • Pingback: source for this article

Previous post:

Next post: