All things related to multicast

["Kevin C. Almeroth" <>]

My personal belief is that if these apps were given more than
just a binary try-it-and-if-it-doesn't-work-do-something-else,
it might help...  hence the reason we've been looking at making
the join process more robust.

Of course, if the current state-of-the-art in protocols isn't
being deployed, what hope do we have of improvement?

-Kevin

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, John Kristoff wrote:

>>On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 19:40:27 -0400
>>"Richard Mavrogeanes" 
>><>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please don't flame me...I don't offer this as an advertisement but for
>>> the opinion and thoughts of this august body :)  Rollover thas been
>>> around for awhile but I don't recall seeing a discussion here...
>>
>>Halfway down the first page is this:
>>
>>  As the name implies, unicast rollover first tries to view a video
>>  via multicast, but if multicast fails it will play the same video
>>  via multicast.
>>
>>You *will* use multicast!  MMwuahahah!  :-)  I don't think that is
>>what you meant.
>>
>>It seems like a pretty nice approach that an application can take
>>to me.  It might be nice if the source has a good feature set at
>>their disposable to be able to do things like "only these netblocks
>>can get the [unicast|multicast] stream", or only X simultaneous
>>unicast streams permitted at one time and so on.
>>
>>John
>>