----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Staal" <dst...@usa.net>
> --As of May 4, 2011 5:43:04 PM -0400, Jay Ashworth is alleged to have > said: > > You know what would make this work *well*? If IAPs *didn't include mcast > > traffic in your cap*. Since the reason for their caps is, in the final > > analysis *to limit THEIR transit costs*, multicast would seem to be a > > really good means toward that end, unless my final analysis is > > contradicted by something better justified and documented... > > > > This would turn multicast into a Consumer-pull technology. > > Assuming that is the actual reason for traffic caps, instead of just the > stated reason. In many cases it seems like traffic caps are being rolled > out in an effort to stymie the streaming-content services (Hulu, Youtube, > etc.) that compete with the ISP's other business of selling TV/Cable > service. > > If that is the case, multicast is just a way for the services the ISPs are > trying to interfere with to lower their costs and increase their quality. > So not including that traffic in their cap is the last thing they would > want to do. Sure. What better way to expose them for that? :-) No business is entitled to protection of its business model. Cheers, -- jra
