Resultados 1 a 2 de 2
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,002

    [EN] Comcast Launches CDN Service

    Dan Rayburn | Monday May 19, 2014

    Comcast has quietly entered the CDN market with a commercial content delivery service targeting medium and large size content owners. The service is already live and the company has a few paying customers already delivering their content on Comcast’s CDN. This new offering allows content owners to go directly to the ISP and have their content stored and delivered via the last mile, thereby displacing some traffic currently delivered by third party CDNs like Akamai and Limelight Networks. While this is the same type of CDN service that other commercial CDNs like Akamai already offer, Comcast can offer a very good SLA since they are a last mile provider.

    Because Comcast owns the last mile, and commercial CDNs don’t, content owners who go direct to Comcast will be able to get a cheaper price for CDN services. While contract variables like volume and length of contract will dictate price, I expect some content owners to be able to pay 20%-40% less than what they pay now. Since Comcast owns the network and has a lower cost, they can offer a lower price in the market. Right now, Comcast’s CDN service is primarily targeting large and mid-sized content owners for large file downloads and streaming of video, both live and on demand. While Comcast can also deliver content for smaller content owners, it does not make sense for the majority of small content owners to go direct to an ISP for content delivery. Comcast isn’t offering what the CDN industry calls value add services, so CDNs like Akamai that get a large percentage of their revenue from services like dynamic site acceleration won’t see that portion of their business affected.

    Comcast’s new service is considered an on-net CDN offering as Comcast is primarily delivering content via their last mile. While they can also support off-net delivery outside of their network footprint, that’s not the business they are targeting. For content owners that have a large percentage of their content going to Comcast subscribers, it would make sense for some of them to take that portion of their traffic off a third party CDN and move it over to Comcast. While Comcast’s offering will be attractive to large content owners, this does not mean ever large content owner will use it. Many will find it as an attractive option in the market as a large portion of major content owners already use a multi-CDN approach to delivering their content. So if they can have Comcast pull content from their origin storage and deliver it locally for Comcast subscribers, and at a discounted price, many will the see the value considering that Comcast subs probably account for about 30% of their overall traffic.

    As the news of Comcast’s commercial CDN offering gets out, I’m sure some are going to suggest that Comcast is doing this to counter the arguments that paid interconnect deals, like the one that have with Netflix, is bad for the little guy. By Comcast now offering content owners the ability to deliver their content directly inside Comcast’s network, this now opens up the service for smaller content owners. The problem with that argument is that it is dead wrong. No small content owner builds their own CDN, so small content owners don’t need to go direct to any ISP for CDNs services or interconnect deals. Small content owners will always use third party commercial CDNs as it’s cheap and they can get good quality delivery from a single provider. That’s why the only companies doing interconnect deals are content owners like Microsoft, Google, Netflix, Apple, Yahoo! etc. because they have built their own CDNs. The reason Comcast is doing this is to open up another avenue for any size of content owner to deliver content.

    Comcast’s new CDN offering has absolutely nothing to do with interconnect relationships and Comcast isn’t targeting small content owners or those who have already built their own CDN. Their ideal customers for the new service would be broadcasters, gaming companies, software companies, large publishers and those in the media and entertainment vertical. What Comcast is doing with their commercial CDN offering may sound like a new idea to many, but it’s not. In 2010, Verizon did a deal with HBO to deliver their content inside Verizon’s last mile for FiOS subscribers. This was due to the fact that Verizon had built out their own CDN, using the technology from Velocix, which was acquired by Alcatel Lucent. Verizon didn’t do many deals with content owners and ended up changing their CDN plans a few years back, but I do expect Verizon to once again enter the market and offer a similar service to Comcast, now that they have a new CDN under their control, due to their recent purchase of EdgeCast.

    Since the commercial CDN market for any ISP is small when compared to their core business, some will ask why Comcast or any ISP even wants to be in the commercial CDN business to being with. The key thing to remember about commercial CDNs is that many times they make cost trade offs around performance. Adding a disk drive to a cache to improve hit rate or a new server in a location does not have the same financial drivers as it does for any ISP. Typically a CDN pays the same $/Mbps to serve a city whether it is sourced locally or from across the country. An ISP’s network costs to serve from long distance drives financial incentives to both add local storage and server capacity to keep traffic local. Some CDNs deliver a large portion of their traffic from sub-optimal locations to save on server and storage costs.

    Right now, Comcast is the only ISP in the U.S. to offer a commercial CDN service directly to content owners via their own in-house solution, as opposed to licesing a platform from a third party. While some might suggest that ISPs offering commercial CDN services will be a trend moving forward, it isn’t. The only three ISPs this kind of service would even make sense for would be Comcast, Verizon and AT&T, and AT&T has already given up on their own internal CDN and simply resells Akamai.
    http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/...last-mile.html

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,002

    Comcast Has a CDN Too?

    According to Dan Rayburn, there’s another CDN in the game and it’s Comcast. We’re not talking about fast lanes in the last mile here, though there is sure to be some confusion.

    There’s apparently no paid prioritization or anything like that. And we’ve seen last mile operators of various stripes worldwide dabble in CDN infrastructure focused on their own eyeballs, Comcast’s seems no different. However, those efforts haven’t made a real dent in the past in the overall CDN market precisely because they were limited to one set of end-users.

    Comcast’s TWC purchase, however, will give them the biggest such set of eyeballs to take to the content providers and possibly get them over that hump. Some who look at this through the lens of the Comcast/TWC merger picture may see this as another example of Comcast getting too big and gaining too much leverage.

    But for now it’s just an interesting development. Another reason that big last mile operators haven’t chased the CDN opportunity is perhaps the simple fact that it’s tiny relative to their current bulk. Put together Akamai, Limelight, Level 3′s CDN revenues, and the next half dozen, and next to the $64.7B in revenue Comcast made last year (without TWC) it’s just pocket change. But of course the video revolution isn’t over just yet.
    http://www.telecomramblings.com/2014/05/comcast-cdn/

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens
  •