Re: Simple Multicast - building a case for a BOF or WG

[Hugh Holbrook <holbrook@dsg.stanford.edu>]

It's important to separate the question of what kind of support makes
sense to have in the network layer from the question of what kind of
applications can or should be built.  If multi-source multicast isn't
supported in the network layer, that doesn't mean that multi-source
*applications* can't be built.  Our paper describes
application-structuring techniques for building multi-source
applications over single-source multicast; I'll be happy to send it to
anyone who'd like a copy.

> what the internet has classicly had as it's claim to fame is peer to
> peer networking.  rightly or wrongly, many individuals seem to desire
> interaction, publication, response, contribution.

I'd agree.  But we've also managed to achieve all of this without
*any* multicast in the network layer.  So, I'd claim multicast (of any
kind) is not required to enable interaction.  Where network-layer
multicast really *does* become compelling is when you've got a very
large number of receivers that want real-time simultaneous delivery of
something (like live video), and where the network-layer replication
and delivery is critical.

> > So, besides large-scale single-source applications such as Internet TV,
> > distance learning ...
>  ^non-interactive
> 
> aka distance lecturing.

With the single-source model in the network layer, distance learning
doesn't degenerate to distance lecturing.  Distance learning
applications don't have to be inefficient or slow.  They just require
a different application structure to allow questions and audience
feedback (e.g., questions are relayed to the source).

-Hugh