Subject: mboned: Multicast Survey for Re-chartering

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:07:53 -0400

Hello;

As you know, MBONED needs to re-charter, and there is a general  
feeling that we
need to redirect our efforts to better support new deployments. In  
other cases, such as in the
L3VPN WG, an operator survey has been useful, and so we are going to  
try the same.

Lucy Lynch has kindly agreed to be the survey "anonymizer".
Replies should be sent to her at [email-masked], and she  
will remove the
names of respondents and send the results to us.

We would appreciate any assistance in distributing this survey to the  
operator community. The
Video Services Forum has kindly agreed to distribute this to their  
members.

We would like to express our appreciation and thanks to John Zwiebel,  
Lucy Lynch, Greg Shepherd and others
who contributed to this.

Regards
Marshall Eubanks
Nicolai Leymann

---

From: Stig Venaas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:02:39 +0200

There are some parts of the survey that are not so clear to me.

In the survey text it says:
> 1.2 The Network Triple Play.
> 
> Many ISPs are currently building IP based networks supporting so-called Triple Play scenarios, delivering support for voice, data and video services on the  same network. 
> 
> Live TV, as one of the major applications of as one of the major applications, requires a low packet loss and delay jitter delivery to meet typical entertainment video requirements, and in many cases will be delivered by an IP-Multicast enabled network. The Goal of the survey is to look into the different requirements on the network from both an operator perspective and a protocol development perspective, in order to determine if there are new goals, or changes to existing goals, for the working group.

But the survey is not restricted to Triple Play I assume.

> 1.3 Answering this survey
> 
> This survey will hopefully be answered by ISPs planing to offer
> a multicast VPN service, and possibly by content provider having a
> need for such a service (not all questions of this survey will
> be relevant in that later case).

This is text remaining from the multicast VPN survery?

> If you are an ISP, the answers should relate not to what you would

Who do you want to respond, not just ISP? Also organisations deploying
multicast in their own networks?

Stig
_______________________________________________________________
user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/mboned.html
web archive:  http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/mboned/

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:53:58 -0400

Hello;

On Jun 12, 2006, at 4:02 PM, Stig Venaas wrote:

>> Many ISPs are currently building IP based networks supporting so- 
>> called Triple Play scenarios, delivering support for voice, data  
>> and video services on the  same network.
>>
>> Live TV, as one of the major applications of as one of the major  
>> applications, requires a low packet loss and delay jitter delivery  
>> to meet typical entertainment video requirements, and in many  
>> cases will be delivered by an IP-Multicast enabled network. The  
>> Goal of the survey is to look into the different requirements on  
>> the network from both an operator perspective and a protocol  
>> development perspective, in order to determine if there are new  
>> goals, or changes to existing goals, for the working group.
>

Correct.

> This is text remaining from the multicast VPN survery?

Yes. Good catch. It's fixed on

http://www.multicasttech.com/survey/MBoneD_Survey_v_1_5.txt

> multicast in their own networks?

Yes, and not so traditional service providers, as many of the IPTV  
providers are (or, at
least, think of themselves).

>
> Stig
> ___________________________

Thanks for any and all comments and corrections !

Marshall

> ____________________________________