& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
paolo.franzoi
paolo.franzoi
12/5/2012 | 4:07:27 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video

metro,

Actually, it won't. The video services of the Operators will come in at a higher QoS than any Internet traffic.

Biggest issue generally will be some of the Bit Torrent issues with opening holes in firewalls and creating DMZ zones.

seven
metroman
metroman
12/5/2012 | 4:07:27 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
- OK so I understand the concept but it will create issues with operators offering their own video services.

One statement made in the article says "the user must be connected to the Internet in order to view the file". I assume that this will incorporate some form of registration with a server doing content verification. Assuming that this exchange will have a unique port number (UDP/TCP) it would be easy for an operator to filter these messages and prevent use of the file. If "connected to the internet" means having link and an IP address then there is no real security.

Metroman
paolo.franzoi
paolo.franzoi
12/5/2012 | 4:07:26 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video

Mark,

Telco TV equals Cable TV and Sattelite TV. Anybody going to disconnect their cable to be able to hook up their AOL connection?

Depends on: Content and Price.

In places where their won't be an upgraded network deployment, this might be quite viable. But in those places, digital satelite will be the biggest challenger.

seven
Mark Sullivan
Mark Sullivan
12/5/2012 | 4:07:26 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Is this a real threat to telco TV?

Will consumers put up with having video caches on their machines?

Will the RBOCs do anything to impair AOL's P2P plans?

I know what the 'interested' parties say. What do YOU say?
materialgirl
materialgirl
12/5/2012 | 4:07:25 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Dear Mark:
I think this is the future, and that we have a hardware-oriented crowd here. These "underground", shared, technologies have always taken off quickly because they alleviate a scarcity. We all have more storage and CPU power than we use, which will only get worse. We all have less bandwidth than we would like. If possible, we will alleviate the scarcity with the plentiful resource.

Yes, meshes and grids are the ultimate nightmare of centrally managed monopolies, who benefit on scarcity. If possible, users do what is best for them. The ultimate question will be how compelling the content is anyway.
rjmcmahon
rjmcmahon
12/5/2012 | 4:07:25 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Telco TV equals Cable TV and Sattelite TV. Anybody going to disconnect their cable to be able to hook up their AOL connection?

I think this question can be asked of VZ's FiOS TV as well. Are people going to disconnect from existing cable/satellite providers and switch to VZ's FiOS TV service? If people don't switch to FiOS TV then what happens to VZ's fiber business case? (Can they make it on internet/voice alone?) If it turns out there is no ROI then isn't it in VZ's shareholders' interest to discontinue the projects? Where will that leave the US when it comes to competitive communications infrastructures?
Mark Sullivan
Mark Sullivan
12/5/2012 | 4:07:25 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Verizon filed documents this week saying that it plans to reserve 80 percent of the capacity on the FiOS fiber network for Verizon-branded services. He who owns the pipe is in control. Interesting.
Mark Sullivan
Mark Sullivan
12/5/2012 | 4:07:25 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Thank you. As for the content, I cant think of any player in better position than AOL, assuming, of course, that the bond with their parent company is strong. -M
stephencooke
stephencooke
12/5/2012 | 4:07:24 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Mark,

Other than for access purposes there is almost zero reason to deploy new fiber in the US. The amount of fiber that was deployed since 1995 is enormous. Here is the thing though, it is not dark fiber that matters but dark wavelengths. Assume that any existing fiber, whether lit or not, is at maximum 10% utilized (as there are up to 160 lambdas specified on the ITU grids depending on frequency spacing using all bands). Currently the standard is 10GHz/wavelength for commercial purposes with some companies talking about 40G. I don't see 40G as worth the effort due to its susceptibility to non-linear and third and fourth order effects (eg: PMD). The potential here is for 1.6TB/s/physical fiber. Other than in labs I don't think there are any such links in service.

The point is that Peter is right for the metro and core networks. However, the amount of network bandwidth necessary is defined by the edge. Until higher bandwidth access technologies come about, and the state-of-the-art ones get deployed in volume, there is no real need to add any more backbone or metro fiber.

Steve.
Mark Sullivan
Mark Sullivan
12/5/2012 | 4:07:24 AM
re: AOL Goes P2P for Video
Former BT CTO Peter Cochrane tells me that there is so much dark fiber laying around in the U.S., and that the pipe that is actually being used isn't being used nearly to capacity. Seems to me that the telcos could easily remedy the U.S.'s poor ranking among developed countries in broadband proliferation if there was a compelling business reason to do so. Right?
Page 1 / 3   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events