[79960] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: cost of doing business
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thomas Kernen)
Tue Apr 19 02:00:03 2005
From: "Thomas Kernen" <tkernen@deckpoint.ch>
To: "Mike Macdonald" <mikemac@nortel.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>,
"Andrew Odlyzko" <odlyzko@dtc.umn.edu>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 07:59:00 +0200
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C544B5.A56FE3F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
RE: cost of doing business
That will not be the biggest issue since most of it is live TV hence =
multicast so that stream will be used by another customer anyway =
connected to the same customer termination device in the POP. Of course =
that will also be depended on the port density of the customer =
termination device.=20
The real issue is VOD since each stream is a unicast stream per customer =
and that currently there is no valid implementation that allows one to =
actually reuse some of that unicast stream content to deliver to other =
users. Since most VOD is currently on a pay per view model customers =
should not be actually requesting those streams if not watching them, so =
for some time that will allow a certain "limitation" in the usage.
Related to VOD and bandwidth usage there is some research carried out =
around the world to solve this issue and one of these solutions might be =
the "multicast patching", from what I've seen there is still a lot of =
work to be done before it can comply with an SP's network setup. The =
other unknown factor is that until now the customer has never had the =
choice of viewing what he wants when he wants so AFAIK there is no =
statistical model that exists in the video media field that allows to =
derive a mathematical model related to VOD consumption.
Thomas
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Mike Macdonald=20
To: Thomas Kernen ; nanog@nanog.org ; Andrew Odlyzko=20
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 4:17 AM
Subject: RE: cost of doing business=20
The problem I see coming is simple bandwidth wastage driven by NA TV =
habits. Many homes have TVs on during the day full time even when not =
watched. Now were talking about as much as 10-20 Mbps (depending in =
HDTV adoption) going into a void.=20
Mike=20
-----Original Message-----=20
From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf =
Of Thomas Kernen=20
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 1:48 AM=20
To: nanog@nanog.org; Andrew Odlyzko=20
Subject: Re: cost of doing business=20
>> fwiw, 100mb to the home costs about that in japan=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> We are talking of two different things here, traffic versus access=20
> bandwidth.=20
> It will be a while before the average household generates 5 =
megabit/s=20
> traffic.=20
> Even in Korea and Hong Kong, where the average broadband link is in=20
> the 5-10 Mbps range, average traffic is about 0.1 Mbps. The main=20
> purpose of high speed links is to get low transaction latency (as in =
> "I want that Web page on my screen NOW," or "I want that song for=20
> transfer to my portable device NOW"), so utilizations are low.=20
>=20
For those of us that are already running triple play architectures and =
working on the data analysis related to the bandwidth usage growth (in =
my case over the last 18 months and adding services one after the other) =
I see this with a different light:
I fully agree with the transaction latency syndrome, people are =
compulsive customers that want to buy right now and you (as a service =
provider) want to see to them purchase the service before they change =
their mind, just need to look at the ringtones market to see how much =
people are willing to spend within seconds for a piece of music they =
will replace in a few days/weeks with their next favorite tune from the =
charts that marketing is feeding them with.
Where I don't agree is on the bandwidth usage analysis, once you add =
the IP based TV/VOD* services you will be carrying close to 5Mbps on =
average on your network in the near future. Either for the one of the TV =
channels (currently the market is talking about 2 concurrent TV channels =
down the same pipe to an end user's home in the North American model or =
1 for the
European) or the VOD. So agreed this is not Internet traffic but you =
will need to carry it beyond your access termination device (DSLAM/CMTS/ =
Ethernet
switch) since the economics of the IPTV/VOD market and (current?) =
technical scalability will prevent you from being able to have a the =
full IPTV/VOD streaming (=3D unicast and/or multicast in this case) in =
each POP to keep the traffic as local as possible. So anyhow within your =
metro area network accessing and aggregating the customers the amount of =
bandwith required to service all customers will grow quite a bit with =
IPTV/VOD services.
IMHO (of course)=20
Thomas=20
*Triple play IPTV/VOD =3D IP packets carrying a video signal using =
(name your favorite format) either as unicast or multicast stream. This =
excludes the current hybrid HFC networks that still provide digital TV =
via an HF stream using (insert your favorite standard here) and the =
Internet access and voice service over IP. Anyhow they will migrate =
once DOCSIS 3.0 and the wideband benefits have been marketed to all the =
cable operators as the "next big thing" they need to have and hence run =
an IP only service for all the triple play services.=20
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C544B5.A56FE3F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>RE: cost of doing business</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>That will not be the biggest issue =
since most of it=20
is live TV hence multicast so that stream will be used by another =
customer=20
anyway connected to the same customer termination device in the =
POP. Of=20
course that will also be depended on the port density of the customer=20
termination device. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The real issue is VOD since each stream =
is a=20
unicast stream per customer and that currently there is no valid =
implementation=20
that allows one to actually reuse some of that unicast stream content to =
deliver=20
to other users. Since most VOD is currently on a pay per view model =
customers=20
should not be actually requesting those streams if not watching them, so =
for=20
some time that will allow a certain "limitation" in the =
usage.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Related to VOD and bandwidth usage =
there is some=20
research carried out around the world to solve this issue and one of =
these=20
solutions might be the "multicast patching", from what I've seen there =
is still=20
a lot of work to be done before it can comply with an SP's network =
setup. The=20
other unknown factor is that until now the customer has never had the =
choice of=20
viewing what he wants when he wants so AFAIK there is no statistical =
model that=20
exists in the video media field that allows to derive a mathematical =
model=20
related to VOD consumption.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>Thomas</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dmikemac@nortel.com href=3D"mailto:mikemac@nortel.com">Mike=20
Macdonald</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dtkernen@deckpoint.ch=20
href=3D"mailto:tkernen@deckpoint.ch">Thomas Kernen</A> ; <A=20
title=3Dnanog@nanog.org =
href=3D"mailto:nanog@nanog.org">nanog@nanog.org</A> ; <A=20
title=3Dodlyzko@dtc.umn.edu href=3D"mailto:odlyzko@dtc.umn.edu">Andrew =
Odlyzko</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 19, 2005 =
4:17=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: cost of doing =
business=20
</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P><FONT size=3D2>The problem I see coming is simple bandwidth wastage =
driven by=20
NA TV habits. Many homes have TVs on during the day full time =
even when=20
not watched. Now were talking about as much as 10-20 Mbps =
(depending in=20
HDTV adoption) going into a void. </FONT></P><BR>
<P><FONT size=3D2>Mike </FONT></P><BR>
<P><FONT size=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>From: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu">owner-nanog@merit.edu</A> [<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu">mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu</A>] =
On=20
Behalf Of Thomas Kernen</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>Sent: Tuesday, April =
19, 2005=20
1:48 AM</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>To: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:nanog@nanog.org">nanog@nanog.org</A>; Andrew =
Odlyzko</FONT>=20
<BR><FONT size=3D2>Subject: Re: cost of doing business </FONT></P><BR>
<P><FONT size=3D2>>> fwiw, 100mb to the home costs about that in =
japan</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>></FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>></FONT>=20
<BR><FONT size=3D2>></FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>> We are talking =
of two=20
different things here, traffic versus access </FONT><BR><FONT =
size=3D2>>=20
bandwidth.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>> It will be a while before =
the average=20
household generates 5 megabit/s </FONT><BR><FONT size=3D2>> =
traffic.</FONT>=20
<BR><FONT size=3D2>> Even in Korea and Hong Kong, where the average =
broadband=20
link is in </FONT><BR><FONT size=3D2>> the 5-10 Mbps range, average =
traffic=20
is about 0.1 Mbps. The main </FONT><BR><FONT size=3D2>> =
purpose of high=20
speed links is to get low transaction latency (as in </FONT><BR><FONT=20
size=3D2>> "I want that Web page on my screen NOW," or "I want that =
song for=20
</FONT><BR><FONT size=3D2>> transfer to my portable device NOW"), =
so=20
utilizations are low.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>For those of us that are already running triple play =
architectures and working on the data analysis related to the =
bandwidth usage=20
growth (in my case over the last 18 months and adding services one =
after the=20
other) I see this with a different light:</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>I fully agree with the transaction latency syndrome, =
people=20
are compulsive customers that want to buy right now and you (as a =
service=20
provider) want to see to them purchase the service before they change =
their=20
mind, just need to look at the ringtones market to see how much people =
are=20
willing to spend within seconds for a piece of music they will replace =
in a=20
few days/weeks with their next favorite tune from the charts that =
marketing is=20
feeding them with.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>Where I don't agree is on the bandwidth usage =
analysis, once=20
you add the IP based TV/VOD* services you will be carrying close to =
5Mbps on=20
average on your network in the near future. Either for the one of the =
TV=20
channels (currently the market is talking about 2 concurrent TV =
channels down=20
the same pipe to an end user's home in the North American model or 1 =
for=20
the</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>European) or the VOD. So agreed this is not Internet =
traffic=20
but you will need to carry it beyond your access termination device=20
(DSLAM/CMTS/ Ethernet</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>switch) since the economics of the IPTV/VOD market =
and=20
(current?) technical scalability will prevent you from being able to =
have a=20
the full IPTV/VOD streaming (=3D unicast and/or multicast in this =
case) in each=20
POP to keep the traffic as local as possible. So anyhow within your =
metro area=20
network accessing and aggregating the customers the amount of bandwith =
required to service all customers will grow quite a bit with IPTV/VOD=20
services.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>IMHO (of course)</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>Thomas</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>*Triple play IPTV/VOD =3D IP packets carrying a =
video signal=20
using (name your favorite format) either as unicast or multicast =
stream. This=20
excludes the current hybrid HFC networks that still provide digital TV =
via an=20
HF stream using (insert your favorite standard here) and the Internet =
access=20
and voice service over IP. Anyhow they will migrate once DOCSIS =
3.0 and=20
the wideband benefits have been marketed to all the cable operators as =
the=20
"next big thing" they need to have and hence run an IP only service =
for all=20
the triple play services. </FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C544B5.A56FE3F0--
