The document discusses multicast networking using broadcast.com as an example. It describes using multicast connections and tunnels to distribute content between networks like UUNet and Sprint. It also notes pitfalls like lack of vendor support and challenges of large-scale deployment. It advocates for protocols like MBGP, MSDP and PIM for more efficient inter-domain routing compared to older protocols. It predicts larger enterprise deployments of multicast in 1999 with improvements in quality of service, management, applications and broadband infrastructure.

1. broadcast.com multicast Peering: Multihomed MBone connections. UUNet UUCast Phase I and Phase II Sprint Huges Network broadcast.com multicast affiliates

2. broadcast.com multicast Tunnels: Allow multicast content to pass over the non native multicast Internet. Peering: MBGP/MSDP/PIM allow for efficient, scaleable interdomain routing and multicast content distribution.

3. broadcast.com multicast Pitfalls Lack of support by equipment vendors. Large scale multicast requires interoperation and standardization QOS. Larger scale deployment is coming. Application limits in scaleable multicast and management

4. broadcast.com multicast Why we do like we do: MBGP with MSDP and PIM are much more scaleable than the protocols of old. They offer more efficient routing between larger networks. Peering with smaller ISP’s does not have the demand of the lager networks. Networks are smaller and content distribution is more easily controlled. Tunnels work, but direct peering is obviously a better choice. The Internet is not perfect and as QOS becomes more prevalent it will become a necessity.

5. broadcast.com multicast What's next in 1999? Lager Scale enterprise deployment of multicast QOS improvements in both management and application. A faster last mile. Creating more demand for high quality broadband content. More standards based tools and protocols allowing for true interoperability.