[38668] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Multicast Traffic on Backbones
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joshua Goodall)
Sun Jun 10 09:10:26 2001
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 14:09:48 +0100 (BST)
From: Joshua Goodall <joshua@roughtrade.net>
To: Tim Winders <twinders@SPC.cc.tx.us>
Cc: Deepak Jain <deepak@ai.net>, "Nanog@Merit. Edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.33.0106100725240.252696-100000@barney.spc.cc.tx.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106101357220.30112-100000@elm.phenome.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
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
