Actually, I think you've already partially answered your own question.
Recently, I moved to a new location and didn't bother getting any television
hook up (obviously being either cable or dish). While I feel the "jones"
once in a while to watch TV, it doesn't bother me much. Back to the
original point: The problem exists in the companies. In the companies
minds, they ask the questions: what hardware do I have (as opposed to what I
need)? What software do I have (as opposed to what I need)? And, most
importantly: "Am I going to make a profit on my investment?".
I personally believe that Internet TV will be a reality in around five
years. I will qualify this by saying that I think it will have some
consumer expense tagged onto it - in other words, it's not going to be as
simple as clicking on "Happy Days" or "Family Ties". Business is business.
If advertisers can't foot the bill, we're talking pay-per-view. The upside
is that we will (hopefully) be able to see what we want, when we want. In
other words, while you may have to watch commercials during your favorite
show, you won't have to wait unitl a specific day/hour to see it.
""nrf"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> hello gang:
>
> I hope some experts like Howard Berkowitz can respond:
>
> question - what is the status of multicasting on the Internet today? Both
> technically, and non-technically?
>
> I understand that the first iteration involved some version of PIM
(probably
> sparse-dense) in an internal network, connected to the MBONE vie DVMRP
> tunnels . Many experts disliked this method due to the inherent lack of
> scalability of DVMRP and, I believe, there was also no standard way to
> allocate group addresses (only via SDR/SAP, I believe)
>
> So, the second iteration consisted of, once again, PIM (almost certainly
> sparse-dense) used in an internal network, but with MBGP to connect to the
> Internet and MSDP to locate other sources while still providing RP
placement
> flexibility. And I also thought MASC/MADCAP was an attempt to solve the
> whole address allocation problem (but it still leaves several problems
> unresolved, like how to allocate addresses fairly).
>
> But now I've noticed yet another group of technologies emerging - BGMP
> (which I am told is supposed to be better than MSDP/MBGP, but I don't yet
> understand how it is better), bidirectional PIM (which seems to be another
> name for CBT), and SSM with IGMP V3 (which still leaves open the question
> that how would you know who to block and who not to block?). Plus, I seem
> to see less emphasis on CGMP, and more emphasis on RGMP and IGMP snooping.
>
>
> But the bottom line is that I still don't see too many widespread
> consumer-uses of multicasting. I only see real-world uses of multicasting
> within companies (financial information in investment companies), or,
across
> the Internet, meetings of standards bodies.
> But, for example, I don't see anything like the Superbowl or the World
> Series being delivered via multicast. OK, OK, that's because of corporate
> licensing restrictions, but I think you see my point, I don't see a whole
> lot of multicasting that delivers information of interest to the average
> user.
>
>
> So, are these new multicasting technologies becoming very popular, and if
> so, why (and if not, why not)? And will these technologies make Internet
> multicasting more wide-spread, or does that have to do with things like
> politics, money, and that kind of thing (layer 8 of the OSI model)?
> Exactly what is happening with Internet multicasting?
>
> Thanx
>
> NRF
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=9660&t=9655
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
