North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: multicast (was Re: Readiness for IPV6)

  • From: Eric A. Hall
  • Date: Tue Jul 09 14:58:53 2002

on 7/9/2002 11:49 AM Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> I think a bigger issue is that multicast is only truly compelling for
> high-bandwidth applications, and there's just not a critical mass of
> users with enough bandwidth to justify deployment today.

Multimedia is the common example but I actually find multicast more useful
for common administrative services like NTP. I've also done some simple
research into multicast DHCP (goodbye mandatory unicast proxies) and DNS
(goodbye mandatory unicast proxies) which has looked promising for the
small investigative work done. In this regard, multicasting the small
chatter stuff is actually much more compelling, although these examples
all apply to a local administrative scope and not to multicasting across
the Internet in general.

The issue with the latter is that there is no killer app which requires
it. As a result, ISPs don't offer it, firewalls/NATs don't support it, and
so forth. I've never had a network connection which supported it.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/