If the content senders do not want this dipping and levelling
off, then they will have to foot the bill for the network capacity.
That's kind of the funniest thing I've seen today, it sounds
so much like an Ed Whitacre.
Then Ed learns that
the people he'd like to charge for the
: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:07 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
...is the first H.264 encoder .. designed by
specifically for ... environments. It natively supports
the RTSP
streaming media protocol. can stream
unicast streams feeding an MCU.
Rambling now, but happy to answer your question.
-Original Message-
From: Marc Manthey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:07 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
I think you're too high there! MPEG2 SD is around 4-6Mbps,
MPEG4 SD is
around 2-4Mbps, MPEG4 HD is anywhere from 8 to 20Mbps, depending on
how much wow factor the broadcaster is trying to give.
Nope, ATSC is 19 (more accurately 19.28) megabits per second.
So why would anyone plug
It's certainly not reasonable to assume the same video goes to all
consumers, but on the other hand, there *is* plenty of video that goes to a
*lot* of consumers. I don't really need my own personal unicast copy of the
bits that make up an episode of BSG or whatever. I would hope that the
future
So why would anyone plug an ATSC feed directly into the Internet?
Because we can. One day ISPs might do multicast and it might become
cheap enough to deliver to the home. If we don't then they probably
will never bother fixing those two problems
I've been multicasting the BBCs channels in the
4:26 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
snip
I'm going to have to say that that's much higher than we're actually
going to see. You have to remember that there's not a ton of
compression going on in that. We're looking to start pushing HD
All this talk of exafloods seems to ignore the basic economics of
IP networks. No ISP is going to allow subscribers to pull in 8gigs
per day of video stream. And no broadcaster is going to pay for the
bandwidth needed to pump out all those ATSC streams. And nobody is
going to stick IP
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Joe Greco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I am concerned the killer application for IP multicast is
*NOT* video, it's market data feeds from NYSE, NASDAQ, CBOT, etc.
You can go compare the relative successes of Yahoo! Finance and YouTube.
While it
On Apr 22, 2008, at 9:15 AM, Marc Manthey wrote:
Am 22.04.2008 um 16:05 schrieb Bruce Curtis:
p2p isn't the only way to deliver content overnight, content could
also be delivered via multicast overnight.
http://www.intercast.com/Eng/Index.asp
http://kazam.com/Eng/About/About.jsp
hmm
IP multicast does not help you when you have 1000 subscribers
all pulling in 1000 unique streams.
Yes, that's potentially a problem. That doesn't mean that
multicast can not be leveraged to handle prerecorded
material, but it does suggest that you could really use a
TiVo-like
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008, Marc Manthey wrote:
hmm sorry i did not get it IMHO multicast ist uselese for VOD ,
correct ?
As a delivery mechanism to end-users? Sure.
As a way of feeding content to edge boxes which then serve VOD?
Maybe not so useless. But then, its been years since I toyed with
On 22 Apr 2008, at 12:47, Joe Greco wrote:
You mean a computer? Like the one that runs file-sharing
clients?
Like the one that nobody really wants to watch large quantities of
television on?
Perhaps more like the mac mini that's plugged into the big plasma
screen in the living room? Or
typically
host well over 1000 clients
-Original Message-
From: Brandon Galbraith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 1:51 PM
To: Joe Abley
Cc: nanog@nanog.org; Joe Greco
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
On 4/22/08, Joe Abley [EMAIL
On 22 Apr 2008, at 12:47, Joe Greco wrote:
You mean a computer? Like the one that runs file-sharing
clients?
Like the one that nobody really wants to watch large quantities of
television on?
Perhaps more like the mac mini that's plugged into the big plasma
screen in the living
...is the first H.264 encoder .. designed by
specifically for ... environments. It natively supports
the RTSP streaming media protocol. can stream directly to
.
hi marc
so your oskar can rtsp multicast stream over ipv6 and quicktime
not , or was this just an
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:
I looked around for text or video from Mr. Cicconi at the Westminster
eForum but can't find anything.
www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/eforum/default.aspx
For what it's worth, I agree with Ryan Paul's summary of the issues
here:
The rest of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Paul Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm. Who exactly is The Internet Innovation Alliance?
Unfortunately, their website does not say:
[...]
As someone pointed out to me privately, this URL outlines
it's membership:
Hmmm. Who exactly is The Internet Innovation Alliance?
http://www.internetinnovation.org/
The domain is registered to Larry Irving in D.C., who was an
assistant commerce secretary in the Clinton administration.
A little googlage finds this op-ed piece from last May.
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:
But given the content there (generous references to the upcoming
Internet exaflood apocalypse), I would guess they are either
compromised of telcos and ISPs or telco lobbyists or both. :-)
Thank goodness anti-virus companies never hype security threats
, April 21, 2008 11:53:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:
But given the content there (generous references to the upcoming
Internet exaflood apocalypse), I would guess they are either
compromised of telcos and ISPs or telco
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The most interesting part is the author bios at the end:
Bruce Mehlman was assistant secretary of commerce under President
Bush. Larry Irving was assistant secretary of commerce under
President Bill Clinton. They are co-chairmen of the
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Sean Donelan wrote:
The rest of the story?
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2008-04-20-internet-broadband-traffic-jam_N.htm
By 2010, the average household will be using 1.1 terabytes (roughly
equal to 1,000 copies of the Encyclopedia Britannica) of
Steve Gibbard wrote:
Maybe I just don't spend enough time around the leave the TV on all day
demographic. Is that a realistic number? Is there something bigger than
HDTV video that ATT expects people to start downloading?
I would not be surprised if many households watch more than 10hrs
Once upon a time, Steve Gibbard [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
iTunes video, which looks perfectly acceptable on my old NTSC TV, is .75
gigabytes per viewable hour. I think HDTV is somewhere around 8 megabits
per second (if I'm remembering correctly; I may be wrong about that),
which would
Why would TV of any sort even touch the 'Internet'. And, no,
YouTube is not TV as far as I'm concerned.
FWIW:
http://www.worldmulticast.com/marketsummary.html
___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Once upon a time, Simon Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 02:43:14PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
You're a little low. ATSC (the over-the-air digital broadcast format)
is 19 megabits per second or 8.55 gigabytes per hour.
I think you're too high there! MPEG2 SD is
Steve Gibbard wrote:
Maybe I just don't spend enough time around the leave the TV on all day
demographic. Is that a realistic number? Is there something bigger than
HDTV video that ATT expects people to start downloading?
I would not be surprised if many households watch more than
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Chris Adams wrote:
Nope, ATSC is 19 (more accurately 19.28) megabits per second. That can
carry multiple sub-channels, or it can be used for a single channel.
Standard definition DVDs can be up to 10 megabits per second. Both only
use MPEG2; MPEG4 can be around half
My directivo records wads of stuff every day, but they are the same bits
that rain down on gazillions of other potential recorders and viewers.
Incremental cost to serve one more household, pretty much zero.
There are definitely narrowcast applications that don't make sense to
broadcast down from
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Williams, Marc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.worldmulticast.com/marketsummary.html
--
We should be careful when discussing IPTV traffic issues. Is it inter-AS or
intra-AS traffic? I'd imagine the beginning of
Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Steve Gibbard [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
iTunes video, which looks perfectly acceptable on my old NTSC TV, is .75
gigabytes per viewable hour. I think HDTV is somewhere around 8 megabits
per second (if I'm remembering correctly; I may be wrong about that),
I am pretty sure he is basing it on this:
http://www.internetinnovation.org/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/94/Default.aspx
which itself refers to the Nemertes report, issued last November:
The Internet Singularity, Delayed: Why Limits in Internet Capacity Will Stifle
Innovation on
All,
Interesting ATT project ... the IP (and voice) world according
to ATT, from a New York State of Mind:
http://senseable.mit.edu/nyte/index.html
Ted
At 03:16 PM 4/19/2008, Sean wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Scott Weeks wrote:
Does anybody know what the basis for Mr. Cicconi's claims
Not to defend ATT or the statement regarding capacity, but...
On Apr 20, 2008, at 4:16 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
The article is full of gaffes, just to mention one Internet exists,
thanks
to the infrastructure provided by a group of mostly private
companies.
I suspect this was referencing
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Scott Weeks wrote:
Does anybody know what the basis for Mr. Cicconi's claims were (if
they even had a basis at all)?
Have there been an second reporting sources, or does anyone have a Youtube
link of Mr.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I looked around for text or video from Mr. Cicconi at the Westminster
eForum but can't find anything.
www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/eforum/default.aspx
For what it's worth, I agree with Ryan Paul's
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my experience, ATT(SBC at that time) hit over its effective capacity
(over 50% average utilization, and therefore no redundancy) around 2001.
Sounds like you're talking about 7018, not 7132 (SBC), and even 7018
is
Paul Wall wrote:
They also tended to manually handle routing decisions as opposed to
letting the IGP handle it.
Likewise, I'd be interested in implementation specifics of how a
network of ATT's caliber could implement backbone redundancy and TE
with static routing.
atm-2, circuitzilla's
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Scott Weeks wrote:
Does anybody know what the basis for Mr. Cicconi's claims were (if
they even had a basis at all)?
Have there been an second reporting sources, or does anyone have a Youtube
link of Mr. Cicconi's actual statement in context? So far there seems to
only be
I believe you have to take in account from whom and where some
assertions are coming from.
The article is full of gaffes, just to mention one Internet exists, thanks
to the infrastructure provided by a group of mostly private companies.
AFAIK, most of the telecommunication companies and
, and are easily bankrupted by predatory pricing
by the incumbents.
-Original Message-
From: Sean Donelan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 12:16 PM
To: Scott Weeks
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
I find claims that soon everything will be HD somewhat dubious
(working for a company that produces video for online distribution) -
I think that is based off the all
On Apr 18, 2008, at 4:15 PM, Scott Francis wrote:
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
I find claims that soon everything will be HD somewhat dubious
(working for a company that produces video for online distribution) -
although certainly not as eyebrow-raising as in 3 years' time,
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
I think that is based off the all American TV going to HDD that is
supposed to happen in 2009. ( I think I read that currently only 40%
of Americans have HDD TV's and the 60% were not going to buy one until
it became too late. )
This is not accurate. In 2009 the US
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
I find claims that soon everything will be HD somewhat dubious
(working for a company that produces video for online distribution) -
I think
: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
I find claims that soon everything will be HD somewhat
dubious (working for a company that produces video for online
distribution) - although certainly not as eyebrow-raising as
in 3 years' time, 20
If the cable operators put their broadcast content onto an access
network multicast . . . Then how could they resell the same content to
europe?
hello,
my biggest problem in understanding the ip6 / multicast concept is
if the whole internet were multicast enabled and there is no
unicast
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
It's a FUD attempt to get people to forget about how ATT owes
everyone in the US with a telephone a check for $150,000.00 in
statutory penalties for their unlawful spying.
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Kevin Oberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:06:48 -0400
From: Mike Lieman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html
It's a FUD
On 18-Apr-08, at 1:45 PM, David Coulson wrote:
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
I think that is based off the all American TV going to HDD that is
supposed to happen in 2009. ( I think I read that currently only 40%
of Americans have HDD TV's and the 60% were not going to buy one
until
it
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does anybody know what the basis for Mr. Cicconi's claims were (if
they even had a basis at all)?
From: Bill Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wouldn't be shocked at all if this was an
Dragos Ruiu wrote:
Bet you a beer it won't happen. :)
I will let you know next February when my rabbit ears stop working :)
___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
53 matches
Mail list logo
