[38669] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Multicast Traffic on Backbones
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Winders)
Sun Jun 10 09:20:50 2001
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 08:20:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tim Winders <twinders@SPC.cc.tx.us>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20010610093041.6276.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.33.0106100741170.252696-100000@barney.spc.cc.tx.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> Unicast streaming may be less efficient, but most providers can figure
> out how to charge for it and make it a supported product. Unfortunately
> some folks have confused multimedia with multicast. While I've seen
> many multimedia multicast applications, I haven't seen one which can't
> have its essential elements replicated by unicast streams. Is there
> a killer-ap for multicast?
Multicast is an extension to Unicast. I don't think there is a multicast
application that cannot be run over unicast protocols as well. Our
application for multicast will be:
live broadcast of academic and technical classes
live broadcast of sporting events
live broadcast of campus television station
live broadcast of campus radio station
video conferencing across multiple locations
All these things CAN be done using unicast, but multicast is much more
efficient.
=== Tim
**********************************************
Tim Winders, MCSE, CNE, CCNA
Associate Dean of Information Technology
South Plains College
Levelland, TX 79336
Phone: 806-894-9611 x 2369
FAX: 806-894-1549
Email: TWinders@SPC.cc.tx.us
**********************************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (OSF1)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76
iEYEARECAAYFAjsjdAwACgkQTPuHnIooYbwXHwCfaSW3hdDEyuj8ZBrXm3PmWNCz
ozgAn3ON/8TLL6rROboNnSQW1WlXfJd0
=5I3y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
