nanog mailing list archives
RE: Broadcast television in an IP world
From: Kraig Beahn <kraig () enguity com>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 11:59:28 -0500
I wanted to note that, in no way shape or form was my previous message a vendor or technology recommendation, nor do we have any direct or indirect financial ties to either party, except that we provide the DIA fiber trunk to pass the live video content from the studio to the GDM peering point. At that point, it is GDM's responsibility to push the same traffic towards the CDN aggregator or their choosing. My message was simply an indication that portions of the broadcast industry have recognized OTT as part of their future, regardless of how its deployed, under what conditions or technological methods. On Keith's note, I wont disagree with his response, except to note that it does take at least 45Mb/s upon launching the channel, at peak, then settles down to 12-25Mb/s for simple HD news content. Not sure which CDN they are using but can find out, if you'd like to test further. I am confident that they do not have Canada in their CDN mix. On Nov 18, 2017 11:03 AM, "Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf () dessus com> wrote:
Looks OK on my old 12" 240i interlace CRT. However, it is not High Definition. Like everything on the Roku it is CATRS (Compressed All To Rat Shit) and motion decimated and unsuitable for display on anything bigger/more modern than a 12 240i CRT circa 1980 or so, and certainly completely unwatchable on a 80" 1080p display. And one cannot look at that SyncBak page unless one disables security and permits unwashed code free reign to execute willy nilly on the local computer. I do not have the time nor inclination to security audit their code, so there is nothing to be seen from them. This means on a balance of probabilities that they are nothing more than snake-oil salesmen. --- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.-----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Kraig Beahn Sent: Saturday, 18 November, 2017 07:14 To: Luke Guillory Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Broadcast television in an IP world The OTT side is already being implemented by a major broadcast customer of ours. Right now they simply rebroadcast their news, both live and prerecorded, i'm assuming until the national networks and syndicators will allow reasonable OTT licensing fee's. They use a product called SyncBak (for which they've also invested in heavily) and offer the streams for all of their market stations nationwide. You can in turn use a Roku or Roku like STB to ascertain the feed, live and in HD at that. We currently provide the fiber and peering facilities, and are intimately familiar with the network and video production side. Very neat product, at that... IP translator and MPEG network side: http://www.syncbak.com Example station: https://channelstore.roku.com/details/47424/wctv On Nov 17, 2017 7:53 PM, "Luke Guillory" <lguillory () reservetele com> wrote:Because local OTA channels are probably most of what people wantliveoutside of sporting events. Sent from my iPad On Nov 17, 2017, at 6:49 PM, Baldur Norddahl<baldur.norddahl () gmail com<mailto:baldur.norddahl () gmail com>> wrote: Much live programming could be done without significant additionalburdenif the community could agree on multicast delivery standards. Does multicast have any future? Netflix, YouTube, et al does notuse it.People want instant replay and a catalogue to select from. Exceptfor sportevents, live TV has no advantage so why even try to optimize forit?Luke Guillory Vice President – Technology and Innovation [cid:image4d387c.JPG@67228580.4c8bfb6f]<http://www.rtconline.com>Tel: 985.536.1212 Fax: 985.536.0300 Email: lguillory () reservetele com Web: www.rtconline.com Reserve Telecommunications 100 RTC Dr Reserve, LA 70084 Disclaimer: The information transmitted, including attachments, is intendedonly forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material which should notdisseminate,distribute or be copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately byif you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mailfromyour system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secureorerror-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,destroyed,arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Luke Guillorytherefore doesnot accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents ofthismessage, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
Current thread:
- Broadcast television in an IP world Jean-Francois Mezei (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Jay Hennigan (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Wayne Bouchard (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Baldur Norddahl (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Luke Guillory (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Kraig Beahn (Nov 18)
- RE: Broadcast television in an IP world Keith Medcalf (Nov 18)
- RE: Broadcast television in an IP world Kraig Beahn (Nov 18)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Jay Hennigan (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Jay Hennigan (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Brandon Martin (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Baldur Norddahl (Nov 18)
- RE: Broadcast television in an IP world Kevin Burke (Nov 17)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Jay Hennigan (Nov 17)
- RE: Broadcast television in an IP world Aaron Gould (Nov 20)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Leo Bicknell (Nov 20)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world William Herrin (Nov 20)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Masataka Ohta (Nov 20)
- Re: Broadcast television in an IP world Jean-Francois Mezei (Nov 20)