The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

Mon Feb 11 18:25:26 UTC 2013

On 2/11/13 9:32 AM, ML wrote:
> On 2/11/2013 7:23 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>> On (2013-02-11 12:16 +0000), Aled Morris wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see why, as an ISP, I should carry multiple, identical, payload
>>> packets for the same content.  I'm more than happy to replicate them 
>>> closer
>>> to my subscribers on behalf of the content publishers.  How we do 
>>> this is
>>> the question, i.e. what form the "multi"-"casting" takes.
>>>
>>> It would be nice if we could take advantage of an inherent design of 
>>> IP and
>>> the hardware it runs on, to duplicate the actual packets in-flow as 
>>> near as
>>> is required to the destination.
>>>
>>> Installing L7 content delivery boxes or caches is OK, but doesn't 
>>> seem as
>>> efficient as an overall technical solution.
>> As an overall technical solution Internet scale multicast simply does 
>> not
>> work today.
>> If it did work, then our next hurdle would be, how to get tier1 to play
>> ball, they get money on bits transported, it's not in their best 
>> interested
>> to reduce that amount.
>
> Any eyeball network that wants to support multicast should peer with 
> the content players(s) that support it. Simple!
>
> Just another reason to make the transit only networks even more 
> irrelevant.

The big issue is that the customers don't want to watch simulcast 
content.  The odds of having two customers in a reasonably sized 
multicast domain watching the same netflix movie at exactly the same 
time frame in the movie is slim.  Customers want to watch on time frames 
of their own choosing.   I don't see multicast helping at all in dealing 
with the situation.

Mark

-- 
Mark Radabaugh
Amplex

mark at amplex.net  419.837.5015