<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Cisco CDN?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/09/a-cisco-cdn/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/09/a-cisco-cdn/</link>
	<description>News and analysis about data centers, cloud computing, managed hosting and disaster recovery</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:57:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/09/a-cisco-cdn/comment-page-1/#comment-9795</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jan 2010 06:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=9177#comment-9795</guid>
		<description>Or they could sell routers to Limelight and not burn their bridges.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or they could sell routers to Limelight and not burn their bridges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/09/a-cisco-cdn/comment-page-1/#comment-3421</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 13:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=9177#comment-3421</guid>
		<description>Cisco&#039;s CDN solutions are crap and expensive. So they don&#039;t sell well.
So from their point of view it would be logical to re-shift their focus and build their own CDN based on their own technologies. But that means they will compete with their own customers and that is the beginning of the end. Buying Limelight also is not a serious option. They lose millions per month and there is not even a limelight on their horizon...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cisco&#8217;s CDN solutions are crap and expensive. So they don&#8217;t sell well.<br />
So from their point of view it would be logical to re-shift their focus and build their own CDN based on their own technologies. But that means they will compete with their own customers and that is the beginning of the end. Buying Limelight also is not a serious option. They lose millions per month and there is not even a limelight on their horizon&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BotchagalupeMarks for April 9th - 08:15 &#124; IT Management and Cloud Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/09/a-cisco-cdn/comment-page-1/#comment-3411</link>
		<dc:creator>BotchagalupeMarks for April 9th - 08:15 &#124; IT Management and Cloud Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:35:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=9177#comment-3411</guid>
		<description>[...] A Cisco CDN? &#171; Data Center Knowledge - So it&#8217;s not a surprising to hear reports that Cisco is leasing space in data centers for a content delivery network (CDN). Dan Rayburn says he has heard from two colocation providers that Cisco has recently acquired space for a future CDN offering for third parties. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A Cisco CDN? &laquo; Data Center Knowledge &#8211; So it&rsquo;s not a surprising to hear reports that Cisco is leasing space in data centers for a content delivery network (CDN). Dan Rayburn says he has heard from two colocation providers that Cisco has recently acquired space for a future CDN offering for third parties. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

