[160754] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Tue Feb 12 11:21:10 2013
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <5119DBCF.2070904@dougbarton.us>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:20:02 -0500
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 12, 2013, at 01:06 , Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
> =08On 02/11/2013 03:52 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>> One of us has a different dictionary than everyone else.
>=20
> I'm not sure it's different dictionaries, I think you're talking past =
each other.
No, it's definitely different dictionaries.
I am purposely staying out of the whole multicast vs. CDN vs. set-top =
caching vs. $RANDOM_TECHNOLOGY thing. I was concentrating sole on one =
point - that the long tail "is _by definition_ a tiny fraction of total =
demand" (Stephen's emphasis).
The long tail might be a fraction, or it might be a majority of the =
traffic. Depends on the use case. Important to remember this =
discussing the pros & cons of each protocol / approach.
As for the rest, time will tell. But it's fun to watch the discussion, =
especially by people who have never attempted any of what they are =
espousing. :) Hey, sometimes that's where the best ideas come up - =
people who don't know what is impossible are not constrained!
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
> Video on demand and broadcast are 2 totally different animals. For =
VOD, multicast is not a good fit, clearly. But for broadcast, it has a =
lot of potential. Most of the issues with people wanting to pause, =
rewind, etc. are already handled by modern DVRs, even with live =
programming.
>=20
> What I haven't seen yet in this discussion (and sorry if I've missed =
it) is the fact that every evening every broadcast network sends out =
hour after hour of what are essentially "live" broadcasts, in the sense =
that they were not available "on demand" before they were aired "on TV" =
that night. In addition to live broadcasts, this nightly programming is =
ideal for multicast, especially since nowadays most of that programming =
is viewed off the DVR at another time anyway. So filling up that DVR (or =
even watching it live) could happen over multicast just as well as it =
could happen over unicast.
>=20
> But more importantly, what's missing from this conversation is that =
the broadcast networks, the existing cable/satellite/etc. providers, and =
everyone else who has a multi-billion dollar vested interest in the way =
that the business is structured now would fight this tooth and nail. So =
we can engineer all the awesome solutions we want, they are =
overwhelmingly unlikely to actually happen.
>=20
> Doug
>=20
>=20
