[opendtv] Re: Internet TV distribution architecture
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 09:27:02 -0500
> On Jan 7, 2014, at 6:07 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
> <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> You're right to answer "all of the above," but not on what you said here.
> Where the mirrored servers are located depends on how many sessions to a
> particular site the customers of an ISP want, and how snappy a user
> experience the owners of the site want people to have. Sites that want to
> create the best user experience will contract for servers closer to the
> customers. And of course, any site that gets lots of traffic will almost be
> obliged to locate more mirrored servers, or risk doing what happened on
> 9/11/01, when the Internet here became practically useless.
ISPs do not contract for mirror servers. Major media distribution portals like
Netflix and iTunes contract with the CDNs to deliver the streams. The actual
location of the servers is largely irrelevant. As you keep telling us, you can
watch content from all over the world; the time it takes for bits to travel
from Germany is virtually indistinguishable to you from a server in Annapolis.
Obviously, there is a consideration of WAN utilization; closer to the customer
means less WAN mileage.
The post 911 situation was an expected anomaly given the spike in usage. And it
is not every day that a building full of Internet servers is destroyed. The
World Trade Center was a major WAN hub, with many floors filled with servers.
Bottom line, the CDNs are in the business of expanding mirror sites to keep up
with streaming demand; obviously location close to demand makes sense, but the
Internet allows the CDNs to balance the system dynamically to handle peak
demand; thus your stream could come from a server in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.
>> Adding the bandwidth to the lady mile is still the most expensive
>> proposition,
>
> That's almost an orthogonal issue. When you have individual sessions to a
> server, the last mile connection may not even be the issue. Much more
> relevant will be the aggregate bandwidth required at busy servers.
Exactly, so the CDN balances the load across their entire infrastructure.
>
> So, back to the original point, a big surge in HDTV traffic is definitely
> going to require multiple additional server capacity. Who is going to jump on
> this new opportunity? It's that simple.
And I already answered this question. The CDNs will scale to deal with the
opportunity.
I mentioned that the Telcos are a major player in the WAN and now the CDN
business. Several years ago, Bell South (now AT&T) built a large building next
door to the CO that serves the western area of Gainesville. Watching the
construction, it was obvious that this building was designed to handle a large
server farm and/or FIOS MVPD operation. The building is being offered for lease
but remains empty.
The major impediment to your vision of the Internet taking over TV content
distribution is not the lack of last mile bandwidth and server infrastructure.
This investment will happen when the competitive environment is appropriate.
The problem is simple: the MVPD business model still dominates, with no real
competition. If you wanted to watch the BCS Championship game Monday night you
needed an MVPD subscription.
>
>> We disagree. For Broadcast LTE the mesh does not need to be as dense
>> as you assert.
>
> This isn't up for debate, Craig! It's a simple fact of life.
>
> Here is the information that was already provided to you, but which you
> should seek out on your own now, to make it stick. For LTE in broadcast mode,
> what is the relationship between b/s/Hz and tower spacing?
It depends on what you are trying to do. If you want to cover an entire market
with the same IP a Multicast the number of sites can be small - in rural areas
you can use one big stick. If you want to have a high level of spectral reuse
within a market (i.e. different streams to sub markets you need more sites.
Achieving a similar b/s/Hz to current ATSC
Broadcasts does not require high tower density.
The only question is whether broadcasters will get into the game, or leave the
opportunity to the telcos.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
