Subject: Re: IETF58 - Network Status

From: "Kevin C. Almeroth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:24:00 -0800

>>On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>>> 
>>> As long as we're bitching about the network: would it be possible to 
>>> start doing some unicast streaming of sessions in the future? Access to 
>>> multicast hasn't gotten significantly better the past decade, but 
>>> streaming over unicast is now routine as the codecs are so much better 
>>> these days, as is typical access bandwidth. I'll happily take 40 kbps 
>>> MPEG-4 audio only; the video is so badly out of sync that it is 
>>> unwatchable most of the time anyway.
>>
>>if you want to show up with encoders I'll give you an audio/video feed... 
>>then you can baby your boxes and not go to any meeting you want all week 
>>just like me. I would be able lot cheaper and less work if the multicast 
>>folks just paid to go to the meeting like normal people.

Actually, I'm not even sure I agree with this.  The reason is because if
we had more than a handful of people watching remotely, it would add quite
a bit of congestion to the network link. 

So, if you are willing to be sent a unicast stream and then provide the
bandwidth to replicate it to everyone else in the world who wants it by
unicast, then I think we have a doable solution.

-kevin

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:29:59 -0800 (PST)

> unicast, then I think we have a doable solution.

I'm sorry I sort of assumed that would be necessary for anything beyond
minimal bitrates... We source around 6Mb/s from the ietf, even the sources
we reflect to other multicast streams (like the ssm sources) we do from
some location off of the conference network, such as the UO.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       [email-masked]    
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2