I'd suggest working with Google if you feel you need some sort of out of band access to them rather than asking here. I'm sure Google doesn't need thousands of people picking weird random ways to access their clusters. :)

Is anyone aware of a non-akamized way to access google? Considering we've had a few Akamai issues in the past couple months it could proove handy in the future to be able to access google through non-Akamai channels. I thought maybe the API access they provide may bypass it, but with a little ethereal work I discovered it simply hits the same addresses. Any ideas?

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:28:37PM -0700, Tony Rall wrote:

On Wednesday, 2004-06-16 at 13:56 MST, "Duncan Meakins" <duncanm@dccnet.com> wrote:

...

Is anyone aware of a non-akamized way to access google?

http://216.239.57.104

(No guarantee that that address will continue to work, but it currently goes to one of their servers in Calif.)

I think the question is truly this: some of the dns responses that i saw had low ttls, should they use a longer ttl? the problems i saw were related to the data expiring from the cache, some of this is to workaround broken clients/resolvers that will "latch" on to one IP (as part of a load balancing solution), but IMHO those people don't deserve internet service until their systems properly do RR... so, should the ttl be more like 1h or 1d instead of less? (random thoughts) or perhaps some of these people may wish to run their own nameservers and just use akamai for content? then again, the whole point of this is to outsource it, i'm sure these people have some SLA in their contracts so are getting credits or somesuch.. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.