BGP Update Report
BGP Update Report Interval: 29-Dec-06 -to- 11-Jan-07 (14 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS4637 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS822069155 2.4% 247.0 -- COLT COLT Telecommunications 2 - AS28751 35645 1.2% 254.6 -- CAUCASUS-NET-AS Caucasus Network Tbilisi, Georgia 3 - AS701 35105 1.2% 36.7 -- UUNET - MCI Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a Verizon Business 4 - AS290731361 1.1% 94.2 -- ERX-SINET-AS National Center for Science Information Systems 5 - AS702 28034 1.0% 38.8 -- AS702 MCI EMEA - Commercial IP service provider in Europe 6 - AS480423274 0.8% 78.4 -- MPX-AS Microplex PTY LTD 7 - AS356117058 0.6% 35.2 -- SAVVIS - Savvis 8 - AS306 14923 0.5% 82.0 -- DNIC - DoD Network Information Center 9 - AS566814082 0.5% 24.4 -- AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet Holdings, Inc. 10 - AS705 13873 0.5% 39.8 -- UUNET - MCI Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a Verizon Business 11 - AS905112886 0.5% 90.1 -- IDM Autonomous System 12 - AS958312181 0.4% 11.4 -- SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited 13 - AS11830 11686 0.4% 12.7 -- Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad y Telecom. 14 - AS330111248 0.4% 36.1 -- TELIANET-SWEDEN TeliaNet Sweden 15 - AS647111087 0.4% 43.1 -- ENTEL CHILE S.A. 16 - AS472510813 0.4% 152.3 -- ODN JAPAN TELECOM CO.,LTD. 17 - AS646110778 0.4% 61.6 -- MFNX MFN - Metromedia Fiber Network 18 - AS815110399 0.4% 12.5 -- Uninet S.A. de C.V. 19 - AS668 9885 0.3% 39.5 -- ASN-ASNET-NET-AS - Defense Research and Engineering Network 20 - AS114869818 0.3% 34.8 -- WAN - Worldcom Advance Networks TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix) Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS354893553 0.1%3553.0 -- TOTO-TECH-AS Toto Ltd. 2 - AS4809 5390 0.2%2695.0 -- CHINANET-CORE-WAN-CENTRAL CHINANET core WAN Central 3 - AS315941395 0.1%1395.0 -- FORTESS-AS Fortess LLC Network 4 - AS9945 1063 0.0%1063.0 -- KCACBACKUP-AS-KR Korea Information Security Agency 5 - AS101004024 0.1%1006.0 -- ASN-AP-UBSW # AS-AP-UBSW CONVERTED TO ASN-AP-UBSW FOR RPSL COMPLIANCE UBS Warburg Autonomous System Asia-Pacific 6 - AS34378 947 0.0% 947.0 -- RUG-AS Razguliay-UKRROS Group 7 - AS392501890 0.1% 945.0 -- COLOPROVIDER-AS Colo Provider 8 - AS12922 662 0.0% 662.0 -- MULTITRADE-AS Bank Outsourcer 9 - AS3043 3286 0.1% 657.2 -- AMPHIB-AS - Amphibian Media Corporation 10 - AS146996122 0.2% 612.2 -- BTCBCI - Bloomingdale Communications Inc 11 - AS27407 604 0.0% 604.0 -- FRISCHS-INC - Frisch's Restaurants, Inc. 12 - AS4678 5817 0.2% 581.7 -- FINE CANON NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS INC. 13 - AS329371154 0.0% 577.0 -- CAC-FOR-THE-DEAF-AND-HARD-OF-HEARING - Communication Access Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc. 14 - AS213911680 0.1% 560.0 -- TDA-AS TDA AS Maintainer 15 - AS381971960 0.1% 490.0 -- SUNHK-DATA-AS-AP Sun Network (Hong Kong) Limited 16 - AS27731 473 0.0% 473.0 -- ACH Colombia 17 - AS33188 927 0.0% 463.5 -- SCS-NETWORK-1 - Sono Corporate Suites 18 - AS31414 458 0.0% 458.0 -- SEVENCS-AS SevenCs AG Co.KG 19 - AS23734 857 0.0% 428.5 -- ONE-NORTH-AS-AP ONE-NORTH 20 - AS124972541 0.1% 423.5 -- SANET-GE SANET NETWORK (AS) TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name 1 - 61.0.0.0/8 4305 0.1% AS4678 -- FINE CANON NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS INC. 2 - 222.127.32.0/194064 0.1% AS4775 -- GLOBE-TELECOM-AS Telecom Carrier / ISP Plus + 3 - 147.60.0.0/16 4003 0.1% AS10100 -- ASN-AP-UBSW # AS-AP-UBSW CONVERTED TO ASN-AP-UBSW FOR RPSL COMPLIANCE UBS Warburg Autonomous System Asia-Pacific 4 - 62.213.176.0/233553 0.1% AS35489 -- TOTO-TECH-AS Toto Ltd. 5 - 209.140.24.0/243235 0.1% AS3043 -- AMPHIB-AS - Amphibian Media Corporation 6 - 59.37.2.0/23 2758 0.1% AS4809 -- CHINANET-CORE-WAN-CENTRAL CHINANET core WAN Central 7 - 58.49.108.0/24 2632 0.1% AS4809 -- CHINANET-CORE-WAN-CENTRAL CHINANET core WAN Central 8 - 170.210.128.0/21 2049 0.1% AS4270 -- Red de Interconexion Universitaria 9 - 216.32.206.0/241996 0.1% AS20473 -- AS-CHOOPA - Choopa, LLC 10 - 210.56.52.0/24 1854 0.1% AS38197 -- SUNHK-DATA-AS-AP Sun Network (Hong Kong) Limited 11 - 83.98.220.0/23 1823 0.1% AS39250 -- COLOPROVIDER-AS Colo Provider 12 -
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Jan 12 21:45:54 2007 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of an AS4637 (Reach) router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/as4637 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
05-01-07203862 133004
06-01-07204012 133074
07-01-07203992 133133
08-01-07204055 133297
09-01-07204137 133361
10-01-07204234 133138
11-01-07204266 133090
12-01-07204271 133169
AS Summary
24021 Number of ASes in routing system
10158 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
1522 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7018 : ATT-INTERNET4 - ATT WorldNet Services
90820096 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS721 : DISA-ASNBLK - DoD Network Information Center
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 12Jan07 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 204425 1331987122734.8% All ASes
AS4134 1233 297 93675.9% CHINANET-BACKBONE
No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS18566 984 106 87889.2% COVAD - Covad Communications
Co.
AS4755 1044 172 87283.5% VSNL-AS Videsh Sanchar Nigam
Ltd. Autonomous System
AS9498 919 90 82990.2% BBIL-AP BHARTI BT INTERNET
LTD.
AS4323 1060 304 75671.3% TWTC - Time Warner Telecom,
Inc.
AS22773 712 47 66593.4% CCINET-2 - Cox Communications
Inc.
AS11492 908 328 58063.9% CABLEONE - CABLE ONE
AS19262 757 183 57475.8% VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon
Internet Services Inc.
AS7018 1522 990 53235.0% ATT-INTERNET4 - ATT WorldNet
Services
AS6197 1022 508 51450.3% BATI-ATL - BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS17488 567 56 51190.1% HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over
Cable Internet
AS19916 567 70 49787.7% ASTRUM-0001 - OLM LLC
AS18101 499 32 46793.6% RIL-IDC Reliance Infocom Ltd
Internet Data Centre,
AS721747 295 45260.5% DISA-ASNBLK - DoD Network
Information Center
AS17676 503 66 43786.9% JPNIC-JP-ASN-BLOCK Japan
Network Information Center
AS15270 494 80 41483.8% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec.net -a
division of
PaeTecCommunications, Inc.
AS4766 724 317 40756.2% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS9583 1023 618 40539.6% SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited
AS8151 827 442 38546.6% Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS2386 1104 735 36933.4% INS-AS - ATT Data
Communications Services
AS6467 415 51 36487.7% ESPIRECOMM - Xspedius
Communications Co.
AS4812 429 69 36083.9% CHINANET-SH-AP China Telecom
(Group)
AS3602 514 186 32863.8% AS3602-RTI - Rogers Telecom
Inc.
AS16852 390 66 32483.1% BROADWING-FOCAL - Broadwing
Communications, Inc.
AS33588 422 120 30271.6% BRESNAN-AS - Bresnan
Communications, LLC.
AS6198 552 263 28952.4% BATI-MIA - BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS6517 401 115 28671.3% YIPESCOM - Yipes
Communications, Inc.
AS14654 304 32 27289.5% WAYPORT - Wayport
AS10139 303 33 27089.1% SMARTBRO-PH-AP Smart
Broadband, Inc.
AS22047
RE: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
If we're becoming a VOD world, does multicast play any practical role in video distribution? Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michal Krsek Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:28 AM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Hi Marshall, - the largest channel has 1.8% of the audience - 50% of the audience is in the largest 2700 channels - the least watched channel has ~ 10 simultaneous viewers - the multicast bandwidth usage would be 3% of the unicast. I'm a bit skeptic for future of channels. For making money from the long tail, you have to have to adapt your distribution to user's needs. It is not only format, codec ... but also time frame. You can organise your programs in channels, but they will not run simultaneously for all the users. I want to control my TV, I don't want to my TV jockey my life. For the distribution, you as content owner have to help the ISP find the right way to distribute your content. In example: having distribution center in Tier1 ISP network will make money from Tier2 ISP connected directly to Tier1. Probably, having CDN (your own or pay for service) will be the only one way for large scale non synchronous programing. Regards Michal
RE: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
You mean the NCTC? Yes, they did close their doors for new membership, but there are regional head ends that represent a larger number of ITCs that have been able to directly negotiate with the content providers. And then there's the turnkey vendors: IPTV Americas, SES Americom' IP-PRIME, and Falcon Communications. It's not entirely impossible. Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gian Constantine Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Marshall Eubanks; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Many of the small carriers, who are doing IPTV in the U.S., have acquired their content rights through a consortium, which has since closed its doors to new membership. I cannot stress this enough: content is the key to a good industry-changing business model. Broad appeal content will gain broad interest. Broad interest will change the playing field and compel content providers to consider alternative consumption/delivery models. The ILECs are going to do it. They have deep pockets. Look at how quickly they were able to get franchising laws adjusted to allow them to offer video. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Yes, the NCTC. I have spoken with two of the vendors you mentioned. Neither have pass-through licensing rights. I still have to go directly to most of the content providers to get the proper licensing rights. There are a few vendors out there who will help a company attain these rights, but the solution is not turnkey on licensing. To be clear, it is not turnkey for the major U.S. content providers. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc. On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:14 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: You mean the NCTC? Yes, they did close their doors for new membership, but there are regional head ends that represent a larger number of ITCs that have been able to directly negotiate with the content providers. And then there's the turnkey vendors: IPTV Americas, SES Americom' IP-PRIME, and Falcon Communications. It's not entirely impossible. Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gian Constantine Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Marshall Eubanks; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Many of the small carriers, who are doing IPTV in the U.S., have acquired their content rights through a consortium, which has since closed its doors to new membership. I cannot stress this enough: content is the key to a good industry- changing business model. Broad appeal content will gain broad interest. Broad interest will change the playing field and compel content providers to consider alternative consumption/delivery models. The ILECs are going to do it. They have deep pockets. Look at how quickly they were able to get franchising laws adjusted to allow them to offer video. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
I am pretty sure we are not becoming a VoD world. Linear programming is much better for advertisers. I do not think content providers, nor consumers, would prefer a VoD only service. A handful of consumers would love it, but many would not. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc. On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: If we're becoming a VOD world, does multicast play any practical role in video distribution? Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michal Krsek Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:28 AM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Hi Marshall, - the largest channel has 1.8% of the audience - 50% of the audience is in the largest 2700 channels - the least watched channel has ~ 10 simultaneous viewers - the multicast bandwidth usage would be 3% of the unicast. I'm a bit skeptic for future of channels. For making money from the long tail, you have to have to adapt your distribution to user's needs. It is not only format, codec ... but also time frame. You can organise your programs in channels, but they will not run simultaneously for all the users. I want to control my TV, I don't want to my TV jockey my life. For the distribution, you as content owner have to help the ISP find the right way to distribute your content. In example: having distribution center in Tier1 ISP network will make money from Tier2 ISP connected directly to Tier1. Probably, having CDN (your own or pay for service) will be the only one way for large scale non synchronous programing. Regards Michal
RE: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Gian: I ahven't spoken to any of those turnkey providers. Sounds like just the hardware, plant infrastructure, and transport is turnkey. =) Getting content rights is a [EMAIL PROTECTED] That and the associated price tag is probably the largest non-technical barrier to IP TV deployments today. Frank _ From: Gian Constantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 9:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Marshall Eubanks; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Yes, the NCTC. I have spoken with two of the vendors you mentioned. Neither have pass-through licensing rights. I still have to go directly to most of the content providers to get the proper licensing rights. There are a few vendors out there who will help a company attain these rights, but the solution is not turnkey on licensing. To be clear, it is not turnkey for the major U.S. content providers. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc. On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:14 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: You mean the NCTC? Yes, they did close their doors for new membership, but there are regional head ends that represent a larger number of ITCs that have been able to directly negotiate with the content providers. And then there's the turnkey vendors: IPTV Americas, SES Americom' IP-PRIME, and Falcon Communications. It's not entirely impossible. Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gian Constantine Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Marshall Eubanks; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Many of the small carriers, who are doing IPTV in the U.S., have acquired their content rights through a consortium, which has since closed its doors to new membership. I cannot stress this enough: content is the key to a good industry-changing business model. Broad appeal content will gain broad interest. Broad interest will change the playing field and compel content providers to consider alternative consumption/delivery models. The ILECs are going to do it. They have deep pockets. Look at how quickly they were able to get franchising laws adjusted to allow them to offer video. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc.
Re: Web Honeynet Project: announcement, exploit URLs this Wednesday
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Ken A wrote: What about common tools that are already being used for this? Non are perfect (or close to) for this, but I am not discussing tools (yet), just the data. Gadi.
Re: i wanna be a kpn peer
Randy Bush wrote: route-views.oregon-ix.netsh ip bg 203.10.63.0 BGP routing table entry for 0.0.0.0/, version 2 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 286 134.222.85.45 from 134.222.85.45 (134.222.85.45) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best Community: 286:286 286:3031 286:3809 Well, if you take a look at the communities here, from what they publish in the text of the AS286 AUT-NUM object in the RIPE database: 286:286 Customer routes 286:3031 Customer in Amsterdam 286:3089 No description I've no idea what 286:3089 is since its not described but it appears that all prefixes tagged with 286:3089 have 286 as the origin. Taking a look at these they appear to be customers. So it could be that these are prefixes that do not belong to KPN but are advertised by KPN themselves (or rather, with KPN as the origin) probably because the customer in question does not have an ASN (or at least a non-private ASN) So its entirely possible this could be a leak of a default from a private ASN customer that KPN carried in their backbone. Of course, since they are providing RV a full feed, not the same as they would to their peers, this should not be a problem for anybody else except KPN (and their customer). The sensible thing to have done would be to have informed KPN privately. Dave.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Dear Gian, from my perspecitve (central europe) it looks like the linear programming is used only in TV/radio channels. But this is only a part of the media industry. Cinema, DVD and other forms of content distribution aren't linear. I don't like to waste Internet capacity with URLs to large VoD community servers. I don't have enough speaking power to write any strict statements, but I think the world of media industry will use every existing channel of revenue. The question isn't if, but when. Some people prefer having their eleven button remote, but some want to consume content they had chosen at time they had chosen. May be I'm wrong but I don't know anybody from teen generation who likes to be TV channel driven (may be I'm in a bad country :-)). Regards Michal - Original Message - From: Gian Constantine To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: nanog@merit.edu Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:26 PM Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? I am pretty sure we are not becoming a VoD world. Linear programming is much better for advertisers. I do not think content providers, nor consumers, would prefer a VoD only service. A handful of consumers would love it, but many would not. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc. On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: If we're becoming a VOD world, does multicast play any practical role in video distribution? Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michal Krsek Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:28 AM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Hi Marshall, - the largest channel has 1.8% of the audience - 50% of the audience is in the largest 2700 channels - the least watched channel has ~ 10 simultaneous viewers - the multicast bandwidth usage would be 3% of the unicast. I'm a bit skeptic for future of channels. For making money from the long tail, you have to have to adapt your distribution to user's needs. It is not only format, codec ... but also time frame. You can organise your programs in channels, but they will not run simultaneously for all the users. I want to control my TV, I don't want to my TV jockey my life. For the distribution, you as content owner have to help the ISP find the right way to distribute your content. In example: having distribution center in Tier1 ISP network will make money from Tier2 ISP connected directly to Tier1. Probably, having CDN (your own or pay for service) will be the only one way for large scale non synchronous programing. Regards Michal
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 13 Jan, 2007 Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 207335 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 112275 Deaggregation factor: 1.85 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 101123 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 24109 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 21004 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 10167 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:3105 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 79 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 3.6 Max AS path length visible: 32 Max AS path prepend of ASN (20858) 18 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 4 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 9 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1654125772 Equivalent to 98 /8s, 151 /16s and 244 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 44.6 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 63.3 Percentage of available address space allocated: 70.5 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 105540 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:46064 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 18654 APNIC Deaggregation factor:2.47 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 43622 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:19166 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2819 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:794 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:421 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:3.7 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 274913376 Equivalent to 16 /8s, 98 /16s and 216 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 86.0 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 121/8, 122/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:102243 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:60587 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.69 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:75424 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 28773 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:11259 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:4313 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:1040 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.4 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 312109696 Equivalent to 18 /8s, 154 /16s and 106 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 68.9 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959 ARIN Address Blocks24/8, 63/8, 64/5, 72/6, 76/8, 96/6, 199/8, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 42963 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation:28092 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 1.53 Prefixes being announced from the
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
- Original Message - From: Gian Constantine Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 5:24 AM Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Yes, the NCTC. I have spoken with two of the vendors you mentioned. Neither have pass-through licensing rights. I still have to go directly to most of the content providers to get the proper licensing rights. There are a few vendors out there who will help a company attain these rights, but the solution is not turnkey on licensing. To be clear, it is not turnkey for the major U.S. content providers. Back in the 'day', these folks were great to work with, but I have no idea of how they would deal with IPTV. http://www.4com.com/Company-Profile.html Btw, I thought VoD was one of the main drivers of IPTV, at the local level at least. --Michael
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
I have spoken with a colleague in the industry regarding 4com. Apparently, they have been able to acquire some sort of pass-through licensing on much of the content, but I have not spoken directly with 4com. I heard the same of Broadstream and SES Americom, but both proved to be more of an aid in acquisition, and not outright pass- through rights. VoD is one of the main drivers, along with HD, but neither are a full- service alone. Consumers will demand linear programming. They have become accustomed to it. More importantly, the advertisers have become accustomed to it. Gian Anthony Constantine Senior Network Design Engineer Earthlink, Inc. On Jan 12, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Michael Painter wrote: - Original Message - From: Gian Constantine Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 5:24 AM Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Yes, the NCTC. I have spoken with two of the vendors you mentioned. Neither have pass-through licensing rights. I still have to go directly to most of the content providers to get the proper licensing rights. There are a few vendors out there who will help a company attain these rights, but the solution is not turnkey on licensing. To be clear, it is not turnkey for the major U.S. content providers. Back in the 'day', these folks were great to work with, but I have no idea of how they would deal with IPTV. http://www.4com.com/Company-Profile.html Btw, I thought VoD was one of the main drivers of IPTV, at the local level at least. --Michael
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: If we're becoming a VOD world, does multicast play any practical role in video distribution? Not to end users. I think multicast is used a fair amount for precaching; presumably that would increase in this scenario. Regards Marshall P.S. Of course, I do not agree we are moving to a pure VOD world. I agree with Michal Krsek in this regard. Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michal Krsek Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:28 AM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously? Hi Marshall, - the largest channel has 1.8% of the audience - 50% of the audience is in the largest 2700 channels - the least watched channel has ~ 10 simultaneous viewers - the multicast bandwidth usage would be 3% of the unicast. I'm a bit skeptic for future of channels. For making money from the long tail, you have to have to adapt your distribution to user's needs. It is not only format, codec ... but also time frame. You can organise your programs in channels, but they will not run simultaneously for all the users. I want to control my TV, I don't want to my TV jockey my life. For the distribution, you as content owner have to help the ISP find the right way to distribute your content. In example: having distribution center in Tier1 ISP network will make money from Tier2 ISP connected directly to Tier1. Probably, having CDN (your own or pay for service) will be the only one way for large scale non synchronous programing. Regards Michal
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: My experience is that when you show people VoD, they like it. I have to admit the wow factor is there. But I already have access to VoD through my cable company and its set-top boxes. TV over IP brings my family exactly zero additional benefits. -- Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.
Nanog subscribers to pull down 2 megabytes a day, continuously ... of one thread
Its the Energizer Bunny thread of 2007 ... 135 messages so far and still going strong. Steve Sobol wrote: On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: My experience is that when you show people VoD, they like it. I have to admit the wow factor is there. But I already have access to VoD through my cable company and its set-top boxes. TV over IP brings my family exactly zero additional benefits.
