[49700] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: multicast (was Re: Readiness for IPV6)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rajesh Talpade)
Tue Jul 9 11:28:44 2002
From: Rajesh Talpade <rrt@research.telcordia.com>
To: dsinn@microsoft.com (David Sinn)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 11:28:19 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: bicknell@ufp.org (Leo Bicknell), nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <AF9E69C4CBFA3C4AA40068F03A2861450995491E@RED-MSG-11.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> from "David Sinn" at Jul 09, 2002 08:10:22 AM
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> Most content providers don't want multicast because it breaks their
> billing model. They can't tell how many viewers they have at a given
> moment, what the average viewing time is, or any of the other things
> that unicast allows them to determine and more importantly bill their
> advertisers for. There is no Nielsen's Ratings for multicast so that
> advertisers could get a feel for how many eyeballs they are going to
> hit.
So why cant the data and control plane be separate for content delivery?
Use multicast for the data part, but stick with unicast for the control.
In other words, end-users will still need to explicitly register/deregister with
content providers to receive content. This will allow the content providers to do
everything they could do previously with unicast data. except now
end-users will receive the content over the multicast tree.
Of course the ISPs will also have to somehow separate the data and control plane,
so their billing issues with multicast can be addressed...
Rajesh.
