Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?

Wed Jan 10 05:43:39 UTC 2007

There you go. SSM would be a great solution. Who the hell supports  
it, though?

We still get back to the issue of large scale market acceptance. High  
take rate will be limited to the more popular channels, which are run  
by large media conglomerates, who are reluctant to let streams out of  
a closed network.

Gian Anthony Constantine
Senior Network Design Engineer
Earthlink, Inc.
Office: 404-748-6207
Cell: 404-808-4651
Internal Ext: x22007
constantinegi at corp.earthlink.net

On Jan 10, 2007, at 12:08 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:

>
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
>> Multicast streaming may be a big win when you're only streaming  
>> the top
>> 5 or 10 networks (for some value of 5 or 10).  What's the performance
>> characteristics if you have 300K customers, and at any given time,  
>> 10%
>> are watching something from the "long tail" - what's the  
>> difference between
>> handling 30K unicast streams, and 30K multicast streams that each  
>> have only
>> one or at most 2-3 viewers?
>
> 1/2, 1/3, etc the bandwidth for each additional viewer of the same  
> stream?
> The worst case for a multicast stream is the same as the unicast  
> stream, but the unicast stream is always the worst case.
>
> Multicast doesn't have to be real-time. If you collect interested  
> subscribers over a longer time period, e.g. scheduled downloads  
> over the next hour, day, week, month, you can aggregate more  
> multicast receivers through the same stream.  TiVo collects its  
> content using a broadcast
> schedule.
>
> A "long tail" distribution includes not only the tail, but also the  
> head.  30K unicast streams may be the same as 30K multicast  
> streams, but
> 30K multicast streams is a lot better than 300,000 unicast streams.
> Although the long tail steams may have 1, 2, 3 receivers of a  
> stream, the Parato curve also has 1, 2, 3 streams with 50K, 25K,  
> 12K receivers.
>
> With Source-Specific Multicast addressing there isn't a shortage of  
> multicast addresses for the typical broadcast usage.  At least not  
> until
> we also run out of IPv4 unicast addresses.
>
> There is rarely only one way to solve a problem.  There will be  
> multiple
> ways to distribute data, video, voice, etc.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20070110/174c2679/attachment.html>