For an industry (online gaming) with the most "sensitive" customers to latency, packet loss, throughput, etc., the online gaming industry is terrible at peering.
That's because they often don't really need to. Content and patch distribution is generally handled via a CDN. For companies that run games with central hosted servers, those servers are hosted in leased datacenter space, often behind a large provider's network. Blizzard , for example, has (I believe) all of their US servers hosted in ATT locations. Most other games either have their online bits in AWS, or just do peer to peer communication. On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 10:07 AM Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
For an industry (online gaming) with the most "sensitive" customers to latency, packet loss, throughput, etc., the online gaming industry is terrible at peering. There are a few shining examples of what you should do, but then the rest is just content with buying transit from one, two, three players and calling it a day.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
------------------------------ *From: *"Jose Luis Rodriguez" <jlrodriguez@gmail.com> *To: *nanog@nanog.org *Sent: *Monday, March 22, 2021 9:13:46 PM *Subject: *Peering and Caching for Epic Games, Fortnite, et al
We run a healthy-sized ISP (say, 2.5M households, plus enterprise, etc ) and we really, REALLY want to make sure our users have an amazing experience when downloading the neverending Fortnite/Spacequest/Blizzard/DigDug updates that run down our pipes. Would love to hear from others about how they're peering and caching -- not having the level of success I'd want with the typical "aggregators" (they know who they are ) and would really like to link to the source even if it means trenching through the core of the Earth...
Would love pointers, names, or any leads, on or off list.
Thanks
Jose L. Rodriguez CTO, Totalplay