IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MBONED] deprecating MSDP

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Mon, 11 September 2017 14:37 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 661FE1330B3 for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:37:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AlfTnHloZZFM for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DEDC1330B2 for <mboned@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 12DAEAF; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:37:25 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1505140646; bh=SODsBFgSuMmaZnDUdM4FlNZrbOzcrt7hmP0mHhmjqTU=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=oqA1bsRBZNA3IOHRH1utm0ulZgdklnYr6UY8tPESSTcP9EFVUeINu4+4Zt7SRGUwD 9jJV2ZpGIpa+RC8e8vocsP4X1fid+3wCvQNeazBM8OuqWre+S3dZMjwkfsuxl8ncZy tyxjIP0rltZSMfYFYi0Cz+WvXVgh1wcGHESx/u/A=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF69B84; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:37:25 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:37:25 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
cc: Leonard Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net>, "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170911135240.GB3600@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709111633360.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <20170904141235.GC3194@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1709051358300.14937@svl-jtac-lnx02.juniper.net> <f911d57bf77245b8b074d3c557ab28f2@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709060825330.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se> <20170907134500.GB23219@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709071602420.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1709071111270.19087@svl-jtac-lnx02.juniper.net> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709072213470.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se> <20170911115306.GA3600@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709111454170.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se> <20170911135240.GB3600@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mboned/Rf4w8Iet86gZiigj5C-GHzhjmzY>
Subject: Re: [MBONED] deprecating MSDP
X-BeenThere: mboned@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mail List for the Mboned Working Group <mboned.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mboned/>
List-Post: <mailto:mboned@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 14:37:30 -0000

On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Toerless Eckert wrote:

> I'd already be happy to hear about examples where that headend is run by 
> somebody else than the ISP (or its subsidiaries, co-owned business 
> entities), and that somebody else is controlling the content. That would 
> be progress in the business models.

Yes, this is available. The major channel distribution companies in Sweden 
can offer this themselves or through their partners. As an ISP you order a 
fiber to them, get it lit up, and then you get multicast packets. The same 
entitity will also do EPG etc to the set-top boxes. So as an ISP, you 
don't have to do much if you don't want to.

> The visual experience with rate adapting multicast and network/fountain 
> codecs is pretty much the same as for unicast/ABR.

Ok. All IPTV I have seen had 0 tolerance to packet loss.

> Without multi-layered rate-adaptive encoding, TCP in AMT will not help, 
> and after a good standard for multi-layer rate-adaptive encoding, the 
> incremental deployment option is IMHO not AMT but a proxy:

I am not talking about packet loss induced by congestion. I am talking 
about packet loss induced by CRC errors on packets (and similar kinds of 
errors).

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status