Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

[Jeroen Massar <jeroen () massar ch>]

On 2013-02-08 17:03 , fredrik danerklint wrote:
> > You really think people did not have problems with the 1mbit links they
> > had back then?
>
> Yes, I do.
>
> > And you really think that we won't have problems with
> > Zillion-HD or whatever they will call it in another 20 years?
>
> I think that this is something I'm trying to say, with the creation of
> this thread.
>
> > > That works if you are only distributing Video on Demands content.
> > Thus the question becomes, for what would it not work?
> > > If you also want, for example, to have the possibility to distribute
> > > software, (static content as well), can you do that with Fussycast?
>
> As I asked; Static content, like in files (*.zip, *.tar.gz, *.iso, etc...)

There is a difference in serving FriendsS01E01.mpg, FriendsS020E3.mkv
and FriendsS03.iso ??? Video On Demand is pretty static, perfect for
distributing with multicast. (now you will run out of multicast groups
in IPv4/Ethernet if you have a large amount of small files though, but
there are other protocols for that around)

[..]
> I do have an suggestion for how to solve this. See my message yesterday
> to the mailing list.

Ah, I get it, you are trying to get people to acknowledge the
non-existence of your tool that does what every transparent HTTP proxy
has been doing for years! ;)

For that you do not need to do strange DNS-stealing hacks or
coordination with various parties, one only has to steal port 80.

For instance see this nice FAQ from 2002:
   http://tldp.org/HOWTO/TransparentProxy.html

Fortunately quite a few content providers are moving to HTTPS so that
that can't happen anymore.

Greets,
 Jeroen