nanog mailing list archives
Re: Multicast
From: "Dorian R. Kim" <dorian () cic net>
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 13:07:35 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 6 May 1997, Matt Ranney wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 1997, Aleph One wrote:Morning all. I was wonderign if anyone could comment on how deployed is multicast routing in real-world networks. How many of you have enabled multicast routing in your core routers? Do you offer this as a service toAll the sites that I'm familiar with are still using tunnels. Some of those tunnels might be homed on dedicated routers instead of a Unix/mrouted machine, but I'd be somewhat suprised if anybody ran native multicast in their core routers. People pay for unicast traffic, and its not worth messing up that unicast traffic for a fun multicast experiment that'll crash your router or run it out of memory ever other day.
While this statement was true not all that long ago, it doesn't hold water with the more recent code, at least from a particular router vendor that I tend to deal with. There are also more knobs to protect yourself with (and also hang yourself with, but that's as it should be. :)) these days. We run native multicast on our core routers, and the decision to do this was based on scalability. Dozens of tunnels doesn't scale very far. Also, the ability to do sparse mode PIM lessens the load you put on your infrastrucutre. I'm also of the opinion that the congruence between unicast and multicast topology (at least as much as you can do it) is a good thing. As far I know, there are quite a few folks running native multicasting on their routers, even though it's still a minority. -dorian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Multicast Aleph One (May 06)
- Re: Multicast Matt Ranney (May 06)
- Re: Multicast Matthew V. J. Whalen (May 06)
- Re: Multicast Jeremy Porter (May 06)
- Re: Multicast Dorian R. Kim (May 07)
- Re: Multicast Matt Ranney (May 06)