[94107] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bora Akyol)
Tue Jan 9 19:59:13 2007
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 16:57:34 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20070109224156.GF10812@virtual.bogons.net>
From: "Bora Akyol" <bora@broadcom.com>
To: "Simon Lockhart" <simon@slimey.org>, Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Simon
An additional point to consider is that it takes a lot of effort and
$$$$ to get a channel allocated to your content in a cable network.=20
This is much easier when TV is being distributed over the Internet.
=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On=20
> Behalf Of Simon Lockhart
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 2:42 PM
> To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
> Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a=20
> day, continuously?
>=20
>=20
> On Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 07:52:02AM +0000,=20
> Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote:
> > Given that the broadcast model for streaming content
> > is so successful, why would you want to use the
> > Internet for it? What is the benefit?
>=20
> How many channels can you get on your (terrestrial) broadcast=20
> receiver?
>=20
> If you want more, your choices are satellite or cable. To get=20
> cable, you=20
> need to be in a cable area. To get satellite, you need to=20
> stick a dish on=20
> the side of your house, which you may not want to do, or may=20
> not be allowed
> to do.
>=20
> With IPTV, you just need a phoneline (and be close enough to=20
> the exchange/CO
> to get decent xDSL rate). In the UK, I'm already delivering=20
> 40+ channels over
> IPTV (over inter-provider multicast, to any UK ISP that wants it).
>=20
> Simon
>=20
>=20
