Multicast Traffic on Backbones
Joshua Goodall
joshua at roughtrade.net
Sun Jun 10 13:09:48 UTC 2001
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Tim Winders wrote:
> Now my eye's are glazing over. :-) Did you mean "receive but not send"
i did indeed. there wash shushi in my keyboardsh.
> UUnet's arguement for charging to sendis that you can potentially chew up
> large portions of their network bandwith with only a small connection
> yourself.
what else is multicast for? hopefully it works out cheaper than your
expected outbound unicast streams would have cost (including the clue
overhead for supporting mcast)
> Very true. I am having a hard time grasping the technical specifics. It
> has taken quite a bit of study and discussion to figure out what I have so
> far, and I am sure I have misunderstood many things. Unfortunately, what
> I am finding out, is that multicast is a subject that rarely comes up as
> an option with customers. There isn't a demand, so the providers don't
> put the resources into it...
things don't gain momentum if they keep changing direction.
<sotto-voce>the same might be said to the v6 folks</sotto-voce>
- J
More information about the NANOG
mailing list