Interestingly (and perhaps not surprisingly) even seemingly straightforward technical issues such as SDV and related mechanisms trigger what amount to network neutrality (and "vendor neutrality") concerns -- and DRM controversies as well.
See: Important Warning Regarding New HD TiVo and Cable System Incompatibilities http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000273.html Cable Industry Responds Regarding HD TiVo Incompatibilities http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000275.html The Coax Straightjacket: Stopping Cable Copy-Protection Abuse http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000310.html --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator - - - > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > this article from cringley may explain some isps behavior: > > > > http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20071221_003697.html > > ... > > > Both Comcast and Verizon are rapidly rolling out IP multicast, as I am > > sure most big cable and telephone ISPs are. > > Switched digital video (SDV) appears to be a simpler way to solve the > cable spectrum crunch because it requires fewer changes to the cable > boxes. But really, it doesn't matter how digital cable works under the > hood - either IPTV w/ multicast or SDV will free up spectrum that > cablecos can use for Internet access. (Uh oh, did I just accidentally > mention the Isenberg Proposal?) > > http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=122733&; > http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=cdn&doc_id=135458 > http://www.lightreading.com/blog.asp?blog_sectionid=419&doc_id=139512 > > Also, it's worth noting that ISPs run mutiple disjoint IP networks. For > example, AFAIK U-Verse has two different IP networks carried over two > ATM VCs: the Internet and the IPTV net. The IPTV net uses multicast, but > who cares since it's a closed network. Will ISPs enable multicast on the > *Internet*? And will customers be allowed to *create* groups or just > join existing ones? These are the interesting questions. > > But my favorite part (and the only part really relevant to this list) is: > > > Multicast also solves (from the cable company's perspective) the "problem" > > of P2P because they'll give multicast addresses to paid content and content > > from > movie studios and traditional TV networks that PAY for this privilege, > saying that this is a preferred alternative to P2P, which will continue to be > traffic > shaped. > > Yeah, just like people stopped downloading music and movies for free > when the iTunes store came out. > > For a more technical look at multicast in cable networks, check out this > article from 2005: > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk828/technologies_case_study0900aecd802e2ce2.shtml > > To find out whether you can talk to the MBone: > http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/index2002.php3 > > Wes Felter - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
