Jon Hall wrote: > Forgive me if I am wrong, but multicast seems like it wouldn't work on > the internet at large. The server still has to send the packets > somewhere. If the server sends one stream to the broadcast address of > my subnet, my cable or dsl subnet is going to be flooded by the traffic.
That is where additional protocols such as IGMP snooping come in. Switches selectively choose to which ports to duplicate the multicast, it is not like normal broadcast traffic that gets duped to every port. > I definitely can see applications in a business setting though where > you have the ability to configure the network so that multicast would > work very nicely though. Maybe if the ISP's did some fancy subnetting, > but getting isps to get organized on anything wont happen... Some ISP's are more multicast minded as others. For me, it will be one of the deciding factors when I need to get a new ISP. > Multicast just seems like the ip version of broadcast tv to me. Maybe > when we all have fiber :) You really don't need fiber for it, 2 Mbit is more than enough for VHS quality. And it is indeed very much like broadcast TV over IP (very nice to have the World Championship Soccer in a little window on the side). Jochem ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
