I am not sure what Google's stance is on deploying cache servers at an IX vs remote connection like the ones pending disconnection. 
If they were to deploy caching nodes at an IX, I assume they would still have a cache-fill requirement in terms of connectivity that has to come from somewhere... of which they appear to be disinterested in maintaining long distance connections going forward. So perhaps this is a donation opportunity for some to entice Google to deploy caching nodes at MICE? Donate local colo and transit bandwidth along with local MICE connectivity?

We have numerous Google caching nodes in our network as well as multiple PNIs to Google, so their pending disconnect from MICE will likely have minimal direct impact on our eyeballs.


-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Wendel <aaron@WHOLESALEINTERNET.NET>
Reply-To: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>
To: MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET
Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Peering with Google no longer available at MICE IX
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 22:03:01 +0000

Has MICE requested a cache box from Google?



------ Original Message ------
From "Anthony Anderberg" <AnthonyAnderberg@NUVERA.NET>
To MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET
Date 8/22/2024 4:28:18 PM
Subject Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Peering with Google no longer available at
MICE IX

I've been surprised that folks haven't been talking about this more and am curious about everyone's thoughts - as MICE user-members but also in terms of MICE leadership and direction.

As a user-member I feel somewhat conflicted: on one hand in an effort to maximize performance I could obtain transport to Chicago and connect to Google there, but I feel like doing so is making Google's problem into my problem and that doing so undercuts the goals of MICE.   We've seen content providers move MICE's larger members toward local direct private peering, and I can understand rational behind that even if it shifts traffic away from MICE - but Google is proposing remote direct peering at member's cost which feels different.

Of course nobody expects Google to subsidize our corner of the world, I am just curious if there are other aspects we should be thinking about.

Thanks in advance,
Anthony



On 8/22/24, 7:24 AM, "Google Peering Operations No-reply" <peering-ops-noreply@google.com <mailto:peering-ops-noreply@google.com>> wrote:

Dear Peer,

This is a reminder that peering with Google will no longer be available at
MICE Internet Exchange from 16th of September.

As a result of unsustainable overheads associated with connecting to an IX
using remote waves, we have made a decision to stop connecting to IXs that
way. MICE IX falls under the category of IXs we remotely connect to.

We will withdraw prefixes on 16th of September, and disconnect from the IX
on 24th of September.

We realize this may cause inconvenience for some peers. If there is another
mutually present IX that we can peer in, we will be happy to help set up a
bilateral session there - no multilaterals. If there is no mutual IX,
traffic may have to be exchanged via indirect paths (transit links).

We are not looking to connect to any additional IXs to replace the IX that
we are leaving, but if you are considering connecting to another IX and not
sure if Google will also be leaving that IX because of this measure, please
reach out to us and we can share more.

Thank you for your understanding.


Sincerely,
Google Network Operations




To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1