[94032] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Sun Jan 7 09:02:27 2007
In-Reply-To: <OF54E911CF.7BA5C3F3-ON8025725C.0048E39A-8025725C.00491AE5@btradianz.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 08:59:04 -0500
To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Dear Michael;
On Jan 7, 2007, at 8:18 AM, Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote:
>
>>> That might be worse for download operators, because people may
>>> download
>>> an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/
>
>> So, from that standpoint, making a video file available for download
>> is wasting order of 90% of the bandwidth used
>> to download it.
>
> Considering that this is supposed to be a technically
> oriented list, I am shocked at the level of ignorance
> of networking technology displayed here.
>
> Have folks never heard of content-delivery networks,
> Akamai, P2P, BitTorrent, EMule?
>
Most of the video sites I know of in detail or have researched
do not use Akamai or other local caching services. (Youtube uses
Limelight for delivery, for example, as AFAIKT they do no caching
outside of that network. Certainly, the Youtube video
I have looked at here through tcpdump and traceroute seems to transit
the network.)
And P2P services like BitTorrent do not conserve network bandwidth.
(Although, they might in the future.)
What does save network bandwidth is progressive download; if people
actually look at what they downloading,
they may stop it in progress if they don't want it. (I know I do.)
> --Michael Dillon
>
Regards
Marshall
