Multicast is not going to solve anything, video already has very
efficient multicast it is called satellite, cable and broadcast TV.
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Todd Brandenburg wrote:
> Here's my two cents on the subject. I've been reading everyone's posts and I
> think you all have good insight. Interesting enough, I started as a teenager
> back in the early 80's selling satellite dishes (the large big ugly ones) to
> people in residential areas and got quite a kick out of delivering crystal
> clear video anywhere the customer was. Fast forward to today and TiVo and
> similar DVR based systems are expected by the consumer. I.E. Content on
> demand. IMO. This could go two ways. Either satellite based IP delivery
> (one-way) with content being distributed (PMP) to consumer based IP DVR's
> whenever either the satellite operator allows the download or the network
> releases them. Thus, let's say you "subscribe" to "Chuck" on NBC (watch out
> for future fees). The network releases the episode and the operator
> (satellite or cable for that matter of fact) does a PMP download stream to
> the customer's DVR. Thus the consumer watches the show on their schedule
> (not the network's).
> The second way of course, is our industry and delivery of video content via
> the Internet and IP. As a service provider we will be in the same "shoes" as
> the cable or satellite company in the future. I.E. The management of
> bandwidth on our networks and most importantly how to charge/control it.
> On-demand content being streamed on a unicast basis is the most detrimental
> to the network and it's resources (because of the one to one relationship of
> the server and client). As some suggest being able to limit Netflix type
> bandwidth is key. On the flipside being able to develop and deliver a product
> that actually can deliver dedicated bandwidth (for that stream) is the
> opportunity. On our network today, in order to deliver that dedicated stream
> (and product) to the customer premise we don't have the necessary QOS in
> place. However, WiMax does do QOS and it may be possible to create a QOS
> tier for muliple layers of QOS. Of course the rest of the network needs to
> have enough capacity/overhead to support the bandwidth. Where WiMax is today
> and I agree, is that we're only about 3-1 on the efficiency side of bandwidth
> throughput. If you watch the cell industry a lot of development is happening
> on LTE in comparison to WiMax (Verizon is about 12-18 mos out for this
> upgrade). Of course in that time hopefully WiMax (in the next generation)
> will hope over LTE (in bandwidth) and on we go. Until we figure out (as an
> industry) how to do real multicast all the way through from the content
> provider, through the ISP, and to the consumer's "DVR based" IP device we
> will have to struggle with network bandwidth management issues. Thus, as in
> the satellite or cable model above, the content will need to be released at
> "off-peak" times to be stored locally by the IP DVR and then watched as the
> consumer has time. We are living in a world of content on my time and the
> days of a network schedule are soon to be replaced by the download or stream.
> Intersting times indeed to be a distribution network provider. We've got a
> lot of work to do to prepare... Todd
>
>
> Todd Brandenburg
> PocketiNet Communications, Inc.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner
> Sent: 2008-11-24 08:11
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] NetFlix Streaming Bandwidth Information
>
> I think we will eventually see people just leave constant streams open day
> and night. How many of you leave your TV on much of the time whether you are
> watching it or not? This throws off the over-subscription model which
> relates to how many people are using the service at one time. When we start
> seeing all channels available at all times via Internet with some common
> interface (Netflix, Tivo, Windows Media Player, Real Player, Quicktime,
> etc.) then we will have this problem to contend with as well.
>
> I hope content providers start making all of their content interactive such
> that viewers have to click something (like ads) from time to time to
> maintain the free TV service. This would help them to sell their ads at a
> premium and would provide an automatic "off" button for the stream when
> people walk away from the "TV" and do not click something once in a while to
> prove they are watching the content and commercials.
> Scriv
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Chuck McCown - 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> I think the canopy 450 will do something like 30 down and 10 up. So that
>> could give you 20 simultaneously which statistically could work if you had
>> 50-100 on an AP.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Travis Johnson
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:30 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] NetFlix Streaming Bandwidth Information
>>
>>
>> You have hit the problem directly on the head. You think a simple Canopy
>> AP is going to solve the problem? Let's say you are allocating 10Mbps
>> downlink on this AP... that would mean 5 customers per AP (@ 2Mbps each).
>> Nobody in this market can survive on those ratios.
>>
>> This service needs capped and people that want it can pay for "video
>> streaming" which is $100/month extra... that would be my vote.
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>> Drew Lentz wrote:
>> In areas like yours, though, some would argue that is the perfect place for
>> some type of licensed LTE/WiMAX type of service. Even with a Canopy type
>> service it would beat down the doors of the telco offering only 3Mbps of
>> service. As more and more devices have bandwidth requirements, the service
>> providers will fall into line, I believe.
>>
>> Everyone has always pushed for more bandwidth, but it as always come from
>> the customers as opposed to the devices. It seems like now, the device
>> requirements will leave the customer with no choice and force them into a
>> decision of higher consumption.
>>
>> As far as furthering the digital divide, I don't think it will hurt it all
>> that bad. On the contrary what would be nice to see is the communications
>> mediums becoming less expensive because of the amount of services required.
>> Just like the price of bandwidth has changed over the years, I think it
>> will
>> continue to drop. I would love to see some research data on the cost per MB
>> over the last 10 years and see what the trend is like.
>>
>> That combined with less expensive and functional equipment (UBNT's Bullet,
>> the introduction of Mikrotik years ago, for examples) gives operators the
>> ability to put more bandwidth than before in users hands at a fraction of
>> the cost.
>>
>> I think more than anything it will come down to a backhaul battle. Fiber to
>> the node, fiber to the AP, high capacity microwave links (Bridgewave,
>> Dragonwave, Ceragon, etc) These are all going to be critically important to
>> aggregate and transport these huge amounts of data.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/24/08 1:06 AM, "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> It will further the digital divide. Rural remote locations will be again
>> left
>> in the boon docks. Where I live, 3 meg DSL is the fastest available
>> connection
>> at $75/mth. Cheapest T1 here is over $600/mth, and fiber? forget it, can't
>> get
>> it unless you want to build about 4 towers just to backhaul, or pay
>> $1200/mth
>> for each cell tower to put them on.
>>
>> Why should the small ISP's foot the bill for Netflix and these companies
>> that
>> are making million's of dollars more than we are?
>>
>> Scottie
>>
>> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>> From: Drew Lentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: WISPA General List <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:41:41 -0600
>>
>> I'm all for open systems. Limiting the amount of bandwidth at any level
>> is,
>> to me, a terrible thing to do. I understand that it doesn't necessarily fit
>> the model as it applies to today's business for many ISPs, but, maybe its
>> time to change the model.
>>
>> This is where the separation of providers starts to take shape. The
>> networks
>> that can handle these loads and supply the end-user are going to win the
>> customers. I honestly think the demand of large scale bandwidth is going to
>> be fed to the end-user by the consumer electronics market. Look at CES last
>> year. Look how many devices demand connectivity at certain levels. If your
>> current service provider can't get you what you need, there will always be
>> someone else who can.
>>
>> There is some great info here from a recent conference:
>> http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/citi/events/summit2008
>>
>> Take a look at the slides. I like the reference to the slide where it
>> breaks
>> down how much bandwidth utilization there is expected to be per household:
>> 35+ Mbps (and those are numbers from 2006!)
>> 4 VoIP lines @ 100Kbps
>> 2 SDTVs @ 2Mbps
>> 2 HDTVs @ 9 Mbps
>> 1 Gaming device @ 1Mbps
>> 1 High Spedd Internet @ 10Mbps
>>
>> Scary how quickly it adds up :)
>>
>> My favorite quote:
>> ³By the year 2010 bandwidth for 20 homes will generate more traffic than
>> entire Internet in 1995²
>>
>> -d
>>
>>
>> On 11/24/08 12:24 AM, "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008, Travis Johnson wrote:
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how this plays out... the amount of
>> bandwidth required to sustain this type of service is not cost
>> effective. My upstream costs alone are over $50/Mbps. So if someone
>> wants to run a constant 2Mbps stream, my raw cost is $100 per month
>> (not including backhaul, support, AP costs, etc.).
>>
>> Wait until people realize that this type of service isn't going to
>> be "free" as they think now.... when they get a $150/month internet
>> bill, the $40 for DishTV will look pretty good. ;)
>> Even the cable companies are feeling the burn here:
>> http://tinyurl.com/3oufk8
>>
>> Or a better story:
>> http://news.cnet.com/2100-1034_3-5079624.html
>>
>> I am glad to see these types of reports coming out. The cable ops
>> and telcos have been rapidly trying to commoditize Internet access
>> services and now they are realizing how stupid that was. In my
>> opinion, high profile companies that are setting these limits are
>> going to help the smaller guys (that's us) "get away" with what, in
>> many cases, we were already doing. BW caps are something that will
>> HAVE to happen in one form or another.
>>
>> <RANT>
>> Where are all the net neutrality people now? Why aren't you all
>> arguing that something like this is not relevant? Isn't this
>> something that you have all asked for? I mean, if I sell someone a
>> 2 meg connection, shouldn't they (and everyone else on the system)
>> be able to run at 2 meg for the whole month? What difference does
>> it make if I am buying a wireless connection, DSL or cable
>> connection? In a net neutral environment, should it matter that I
>> am streaming this type of content?
>> </RANT>
>>
>> I feel better. ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> ---
>> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>
>>
>> Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as
>> $30.00/mth.
>> Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1808 - Release Date: 11/23/08 18:59
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1808 - Release Date: 11/23/08 18:59
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
