Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

[Aled Morris <aledm () qix co uk>]

I don't see why, as an ISP, I should carry multiple, identical, payload
packets for the same content.  I'm more than happy to replicate them closer
to my subscribers on behalf of the content publishers.  How we do this is
the question, i.e. what form the "multi"-"casting" takes.

It would be nice if we could take advantage of an inherent design of IP and
the hardware it runs on, to duplicate the actual packets in-flow as near as
is required to the destination.

Installing L7 content delivery boxes or caches is OK, but doesn't seem as
efficient as an overall technical solution.

Aled


On 11 February 2013 11:03, Adam Vitkovsky <adam.vitkovsky () swan sk> wrote:

> I don't see a need for multicast to work in Internet scale, ever.
>
> adam
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saku Ytti [mailto:saku () ytti fi]
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 6:02 PM
> To: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
>
> On (2013-02-08 14:15 +0000), Aled Morris wrote:
>
> > "Multicast"
>
> I don't see multicast working in Internet scale.
>
> Essentially multicast means core is flow-routing. So we'd need some way to
> decide who gets to send their content as multicast and who are forced to
> send unicast.
> It could create de-facto monopolies, as new entries to the market wont have
> their multicast carried, they cannot compete pricing wise with established
> players who are carried.
>
> --
>   ++ytti