On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:11:50 AM Stefan Fouant wrote: > On the other hand, S-PMSIs definitely make sense where > receivers are more sparsely distributed and bandwidth > considerations are paramount so relieving unnecessary > replication state is desired.
Completely agree. In our case, if we didn't have the need to have an MPEG probe at every Receiver PE router that had interested IPTv customers, we certainly wold have gone with S-PMSI's (the probe needs to monitor all channels, not just a few). Suffice it to say, right now, we don't have any PE routers that aren't also Multicast Receiver PE routers. We can still use S-PMSI's even with the probe everywhere, it's just that the point of doing so becomes moot when the probes aren't selective in their monitoring of the various IPTv streams. Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
