On 30/04/2011, at 5:44 AM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
Delivering multicast to end users is fundamentally not hard. The
biggest issue seems to be with residential CPE (pretty much the same
problem as IPv6, really).
Well, more than that, since I don't really want my DSL pipe saturated
On Friday, April 29, 2011 03:37:04 PM Jay Ashworth wrote:
You've conflated my two points. That would tell the *carriers* who's watching
what, but they probably don't care. I was talking about *the providers*
knowing (think DRM and 3096 viewers online).
And then if there's music, the
On Friday, April 29, 2011 05:16:51 PM George Bonser wrote:
But if broadcast events over the internet are treated the same as
broadcast events over RF, who cares?
They're not; that's the problem. For the US, at least, the Copyright Office of
the Library of Congress has statutory authority in
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Chris Adams wrote:
I can also see how this affects the ISPs providing bandwidth to the
content providers. In our colo for example, we rate-limit customers to
the paid-for bandwidth at the colo port. With multicast however, they
could use significantly more bandwidth,
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:34:15 -0700, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Octavio Alvarez alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org said:
So the first user in a router tunes to a multicast stream. Consumption
for the ISP and all the routers in the chain to the source: same as if
it were a
Isn't the real problem with global multicast: How do we ultimately
bill the broadcaster for all that traffic amplification that happened
*inside* every other AS? It seems like you'd have to do per-packet
accounting at every router, and coordinate billing/reporting amongst
all providers that
- Original Message -
From: Rubens Kuhl rube...@gmail.com
Isn't the real problem with global multicast: How do we ultimately
bill the broadcaster for all that traffic amplification that
happened
*inside* every other AS? It seems like you'd have to do per-packet
accounting at
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:48:51 EDT, Jay Ashworth said:
Will they not complain about having their equipment utilization go up
with no recompense -- for something that is only of benefit to commercial
customers of some other entity?
Like their load didn't go up with no recompense this morning.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Rubens Kuhl rube...@gmail.com
Isn't the real problem with global multicast: How do we ultimately
bill the broadcaster for all that traffic amplification that
happened
*inside* every
On 29/04/11 14:04 -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:48:51 EDT, Jay Ashworth said:
Will they not complain about having their equipment utilization go up
with no recompense -- for something that is only of benefit to commercial
customers of some other entity?
Like
On Fri Apr 29, 2011 at 01:48:51PM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Will they not complain about having their equipment utilization go up
with no recompense -- for something that is only of benefit to commercial
customers of some other entity?
Sorry, but are your eyeballs not already paying you for
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lockhart si...@slimey.org
On Fri Apr 29, 2011 at 01:48:51PM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Will they not complain about having their equipment utilization go up
with no recompense -- for something that is only of benefit to
commercial customers of some
On Fri Apr 29, 2011 at 03:03:47PM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote:
The real problem I see myself is that *the Mbone has to be pervasive* (or
mostly so) for this to be a worthwhile investment for providers.
What is missing is an adaptive client (be it flash, or HTML5) which will
transparently use
On 4/29/2011 2:47 PM, Dan White wrote:
On 29/04/11 14:04 -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:48:51 EDT, Jay Ashworth said:
What's the break-even point, the number of streams being sent at once
where
multicasting it starts taking less resources than N unicast streams?
From: Jay Ashworth
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 10:13 AM
To: NANOG
Subject: How do you put a TV station on the Mbone? (was: Royal
Wedding...)
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Malayter
On Apr 28, 11:14 pm, Jay Ashworth wrote:
(cough)multicast(cough)
But... but...
- Original Message -
From: George Bonser gbon...@seven.com
Internet engineers are prone to try to solve this problem in favor of
the viewer, and their networks -- with their networks winning in case
of a push.
Should be easy enough on your subscriber ports to use igmp to see who
Delivering multicast to end users is fundamentally not hard. The
biggest issue seems to be with residential CPE (pretty much the same
problem as IPv6, really).
Well, more than that, since I don't really want my DSL pipe saturated
with TV that I'm not watching, you need some way for the CPE to
From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi@nanog.org Fri Apr 29 12:24:21
2011
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:23:23 -0300
Subject: Re: How do you put a TV station on the Mbone? (was: Royal Wedding...)
From: Rubens Kuhl rube...@gmail.com
To: Nanog nanog@nanog.org
Isn't the real problem with
You've conflated my two points. That would tell the *carriers* who's
watching
what, but they probably don't care. I was talking about *the
providers*
knowing (think DRM and 3096 viewers online).
Cheers,
-- jra
It would be done the same way it is done currently with cable TV. Who
Well, more than that, since I don't really want my DSL pipe saturated
with TV that I'm not watching, you need some way for the CPE to tell
the ISP send me stream N
That is what igmp is for. Only send what I specifically request.
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:48:51 -0700, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Rubens Kuhl rube...@gmail.com
And that's the snap answer, yes. But the *load*, while admittedly
lessened over unicast, falls *mostly* to the carriers, who cannot anymore
bill for it,
On Apr 29, 2011, at 3:44 PM, John Levine wrote:
Delivering multicast to end users is fundamentally not hard. The
biggest issue seems to be with residential CPE (pretty much the same
problem as IPv6, really).
Well, more than that, since I don't really want my DSL pipe saturated
with TV
22 matches
Mail list logo
