Subject: Re: Raising the bar on the MBone

From: Petri Helenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:40:05 +0300 (EEST)

At 00:35 1.8.1997, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>
>Steve (et al),
>
>To help satisfy that last bullet, I'd like to strongly encourage that you
>also try to include some content that's appropriate for *low bandwidth*
>Internet connections.  By "low bandwidth", I don't mean ISDN - I mean 28.8
>kbps!  Like it or not, this is where most of the Internet lives, and the
>bulk of the most innovative content on the Internet in recent years has
>been for this level of bandwidth.  Progressive Networks and others have
>demonstrated that audio (& even video, if you squint hard enough :-) can
>work at this level.  Plus there are other multicast-based applications -
>besides A/V - that can work well at these bandwidths.

Yes. As you well say that has been done and it only needs the application
developers like 
Pointcast and others to take advantage of the technology. However what there
has NOT been is higher bandwidth experiments with any content with the
exception of Stockholm IETF where higher bw streams were sent with very
variable success. 
So I see the definite need for a highbandwidth source in order to test, fix
and push the barrier higher for future. (however I acknowledge the lack of
technology to scale to high number of multicast groups)

Additionally, I don't see there being that much of a problem on scaling when
we would be talking about small number of groups distributed to large
audiences than the other way around.
>
>One of the necessary steps for IP multicast to become ubiquitously deployed
>is for more dialup routers to implement multicast routing, and the best way
>for this to happen is to create more demand for it.
>
The whole dialup-land is a mess which should be replaced by more advanced
technology like xDSL to get it off the shoulders of the PSTN.

Pete

---

From: "Heiko W. Rupp" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:06:33 +0200

> has NOT been is higher bandwidth experiments with any content with the

What is 'higher bandwidth' in that context?

-- 
NTG Netzwerk und Telematic GmbH   /          Heiko W.Rupp
Geschaeftsbereich Xlink         \/           phone: +49 721 9652 0
Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3       /\ link      fax:   +49 721 9652 210
D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany     /_______      email: [email-masked]
[ NTG Netzwerk und Telematic GmbH, Sitz Chemnitz                          ]
[ Kreisgericht Chemnitz/Stadt HRB 4217, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michael Rotert ]

---

From: Ross Finlayson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 15:23:55

>technology like xDSL to get it off the shoulders of the PSTN.

While this is true, we need to avoid falling into an old trap:
1/ The "unwashed masses" are using crappy, old technology.
2/ We (the CS/networking research community) are using much better technology.
THEREFORE:
3/ We can just ignore the "unwashed masses".  When the time comes that our
technology becomes affordable to them, they will drop their crappy old
technology, and rush to use ours instead.

We have been hurt over and over again by (incorrectly) assuming that points
1 and 2 imply point 3.  What inevitably happens instead is that someone
sees an opportunity and develops a "poor man's" substitute for our
technology that, while technologically flawed, is usable by the "unwashed
masses".  This substitute technology ends up becoming popular - both
because it's the only thing out there, and because there are so many
"unwashed masses" - and thus becomes difficult to displace.  (E.g., we end
up with application-specific hacks like "CU-SeeMe reflectors".)

INSTEAD:
3'/ We should try to embrace the "unwashed masses" by making our technology
(& services) available to them, at least in a limited form, while we
continue to move forward.  This gives them an incentive - and a clean
migration path - to upgrade later.

Looking specifically at dialup modem users, there are now mechanisms
available -  e.g., see "http://www.lvn.com/multikit/tunnel.html" - that
will allow them to access the MBone, albeit with some restrictions, pending
direct multicast support in dialup routers.  What we need now, however, is
more low-bandwidth MBone content.

	Ross.

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 19:43:36 -0700

From The Desk Of Ross Finlayson :
> 2/ We (the CS/networking research community) are using much better technology

First of, I doubt that many in the CS/networking research community have
high speed access to their homes which brings up the interesting
issue if I am typically working during the day is kind of hard for 
me to justify watching "tv". H.261 is great however the video tools
need to be updated to h.263 and if you must transmit high speed audio then use
something like mpeg.

Till we don't reach the home market ( 28.8 kb/s ) the mbone will remain a
an exotic technology for the technocrats. 

	Enjoy,
	Amancio

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 19:43:36 -0700

Enjoy,
	Amancio

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 19:20:57 +0200 (MET DST)

> an exotic technology for the technocrats. 

No point taken against mbone:

Till the home market doesn't change to ADSL or the like, most of the stuff
we do at work remains an exotic technology for the office workers anyway.

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 12:08:56 -0700

At the very least , existing Win95/WinNt network audio tools proves
you wrong so yes it is a point against the Mbone.

	Regards,
	Amancio

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 19:43:36 -0700

Enjoy,
	Amancio

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 12:08:56 -0700

Regards,
	Amancio

---

From: Bob Quinn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 22:35:56 -0400

>an exotic technology for the technocrats. 

Speaking as an unwashed mass, I sure wish I had something 
worthwhile to fill this 1.5Mbps cable modem feed that I have 
into my home (from MediaOne in Boston).  Some interactive IETF 
"tv" live from Munich would be nice, for instance.

bq

---

From: Amancio Hasty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 12:08:56 -0700

Regards,
	Amancio