Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Does Your Uplink Multicast?

Posted by Cliff on from the better-network-performance dept.

knof asks: "It seems like the big ISPs want to waste bandwidth, because they don't support technologies like multicast, at least here in Germany. As far as I know the only way to get multicast access is to setup a feed to the MBone or to use the DFN (Deutsches ForschungsNetz) if you're a student, which I am not. Is it expensive or difficult for ISPs to make their networks multicast aware? How is the situation in other countries? And are there any ISPs in Germany which are Multicast friendly?" It would be interesting to know how much of the Internet is capable of multicasting. Even here in the US, I don't believe it's getting widely used. Is this changing?

34 comments

  1. Multicast by Tuzanor · · Score: 4, Interesting
    over the internet, multicast is a pretty much a useless feature. A lot of the time it won't even work because a lot of routers have been configured to ignore multicast addresses to save space on the routing tables. If only early on they knew that streaming video/audio was coming...

    Considering how many IPs are wasted for multicast, its really no wonder why we're at a shortage right now. Whoever sorted the current IP space needs to be shot in the HEAD (so that his brain may NEVER be brought back). 16 million IPs for loopback? excuse me? out of that whole block the only one that gets any use is 127.0.0.1

    Those Class D and E spaces could have given us many usefull IPs...and now...useless.

    1. Re:Multicast by Harumuka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      a lot of routers have been configured to ignore multicast addresses

      Can you provide a reliable source to back up this claim? Quoting directly from W. Richard Steven's Unix Networking Program, Volume 1, page 901:

      The end result is that the multicast datagram sent on the top LAN also gets transmitted as a multicast datagram on the lower LAN. This occurs even through the two routers that we show attached to these LANs, and all the Internet routers between these two routers, are not multicast capable. (Emphasis mine)

      Of course, ignoring multicast address is a different thing, but I see no evidence to back up your claims.

      --
      What do you think of MusicCity now?
    2. Re:Multicast by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

      You've only quoted the"end result" how did he get this? there are, of course, hacks to everything.

    3. Re:Multicast by Harumuka · · Score: 1

      Basically, a tunnel is created between one of the multicast-capable hosts on each LAN using the MBone. The MBone is similar in concept to the 6Bone, which I've successfully used for connecting as an IPv6 host though my ISP doesn't support it. Such is the beauty of virtual tunnels.

      --
      What do you think of MusicCity now?
    4. Re:Multicast by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

      well in that light, multicast can work because its tunneled...its not actually "multicasting" over the internet, its just multicasting through the networks at each end of the tunnel. Its kind of like how they got old SPX only games to run over the internet, by having special software that tunneled it to an internet server making it look like one big IPX/SPX LAN...quite ingenious. But it doesn't work for everybody unless they have the software.

    5. Re:Multicast by aozilla · · Score: 2

      Considering how many IPs are wasted for multicast, its really no wonder why we're at a shortage right now.

      We don't really have a shortage of IP addresses. Any machine connected to the internet which doesn't have an IP address, doesn't have one for reasons other than a shortage. Some of us might like to have multiple IP address for a single machine, or would like to keep our IP address even when we're not connected to the internet, but doing this is never an efficient solution anyway.

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
    6. Re:Multicast by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

      True, the "shortage" isn't because of one reason, its because one organization grabs 16 million class A addresses and doesn't sell/lease out the ones they don't use, and its because wireless devices using IPs when they could really just be NATed, and its because of wasting them using useless features, etc,etc,etc

    7. Re:Multicast by aozilla · · Score: 2

      What I'm saying is that there is no shortage at all. I know of no example of someone with a legitimate need for an IP address who can't get one.

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
    8. Re:Multicast by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

      yet. but soon they may get mor expensive

    9. Re:Multicast by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      But you can no longer purchase address blocks from IANA, for example (IANA or ARIN? I forget now) without purchasing a /19 block -- that's a lot of wasted addresses if you just want your own permanent /24 or /27 ...

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    10. Re:Multicast by aozilla · · Score: 2

      But you only need to purchase from IANA if you need portable address space. If you only need a /24 or /27, you should be purchasing it from your ISP. We don't need routing tables clogged with /24s and /27s. If you need portability, use DNS. If you need reliability, use DNS.

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  2. Multicast on an ISP is bad by Snowfox · · Score: 1, Funny
    Multicasting is bad. A lot of games use it, and that could chew up a LOT of bandwidth, certainly enough to saturate the 10mbit NIC or USB connection used for many broadband setups.

    Even in our own office, I wish we could kill multicasting. We make games here, and in the evening, a lot of groups of guys are playing games that spew enough multicast packets to bring our 100mbit network to its knees. (Yes, we're using switches, not hubs.) Playstation 2 debugging uses a network connection between the PS2 and PC. Debugging becomes slow as molasses unless you unplug your uplink or put a 2nd NIC in and connect to your PS2 TOOL directly.

    1. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by zsazsa · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Do you mean broadcast packets?

    2. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by sparetiredesire · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do you even know what "multicast" is? Multicast is more efficient for multi-party communication. If you sent seperate packets to each of K users you'd use K times the bandwidth on your outgoing link. This is what happens if you use unicast instead.

      With multicast you send a single packet, and the network replicates it at the latest possible point. What would you propose as a more efficient means?

    3. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by knof · · Score: 0, Redundant

      maybe it's not good for games, but for multimedia stuff (video streaming) it would save a lot of bandwith

    4. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me get this straight:

      You're in the business of making money by selling video games, and yet are offended when people play them when it happens to interfere with your odd working hours.

      Do you simply fail to realize that you're to blame for this percieved problem?

    5. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by Snowfox · · Score: 2
      Multicasting is bad. A lot of games use it, and that could chew up a LOT of bandwidth, certainly enough to saturate the 10mbit NIC or USB connection used for many broadband setups.

      Mental speedbump. I was reacting to broadcast, not multicast, as AC points out.

    6. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by Snowfox · · Score: 1
      You're in the business of making money by selling video games, and yet are offended when people play them when it happens to interfere with your odd working hours.

      Need to calm down, dude. I'm bugged by the games slamming on the net bandwidth, not the games themselves or the people playing the games. If networking were implemented properly in these games (or our switches were smart enough not to just broadcast multicast packets, if that's the problem), it wouldn't affect me at all.

    7. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by CharlieG · · Score: 2

      1)Your thinking Broadcast
      2)Multicast can be great, if you can get your LAN guys to get it on line, and keep it there

      We have an application that has about 300 - 500 simultaneous users here at the office - Updates often have to go to ALL the users screens right away. Multicast is the only effective way to go. We have problems with segments going down - so we end up having to put up Multicast tunnels, but that leads to echo problems

      Sigh

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    8. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by adjuster · · Score: 1

      Even in our own office, I wish we could kill multicasting. We make games here, and in the evening, a lot of groups of guys are playing games that spew enough multicast packets to bring our 100mbit network to its knees. (Yes, we're using switches, not hubs.)

      You need switches that support IGMP spoofing, then. If the traffic really is multicast, and not broadcast, IGMP spoofing is what you're looking for.

      <KARMA-WHORING>
      Take a look here-- it's a pretty decent article on IP multicast (not really technical-- just buzz-laden). Some rudimentary technical information is in here.
      &lt/KARMA-WHORING>

      --
      The Attitude Adjuster, I hate me, you can too.
    9. Re:Multicast on an ISP is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Multicast still uses bandwidth and is pretty close to broadcast in its implementation.

  3. 10 OSes on 1 computer. by Blaede · · Score: 1

    http://www.hyperos2002.com/

  4. Multicast is dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Film at eleven.

  5. For all of us who are Multicast illiterate by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 5, Informative

    A quick search on google revealed this great article!

    Multicast Explanation

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
  6. Does your Penis Multisnot? by George+WIPO+Bush · · Score: -1
    THE OFFICIAL TACO-SNOTTING FAQ By The WIPO Troll, $Revision: 1.12 $

    Why have I been receiving emails from CmdrTaco, in which he seems to be speaking in some kind of code language?

    Whenever Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda gets bored (and who wouldn't, running a site like Slashdot all day), he roams through the Slashdot database, penis in hand, looking for people who might enjoy engaging in homosexual orgies with him. How he determines this is anyone's guess; but if you have a homosexual-sounding nickname, or a nick with the letter P in it, you're in trouble.
    So this time, he found you. Lucky you.
    CmdrTaco's code language is relatively easy to decipher. He prefers to speak in thinly-veiled sexual innuendo to evade the watchful (but relatively stupid) eye of Slashdot's parent corporation, VA Software. CmdrTaco's "Commander" is, of course, his penis -- a small, withered little thing that lives in his pants that only comes out in the presence of other men or at the beck and call of CmdrTaco's own right hand. His "Taco bells" are the shriveled testes that droop beneath his Commander, and his "Taco sauce" is his, well, jizz. It should be more than obvious to you now what he means when he asks you to "ring his Taco bells" or "taste his gourmet Taco sauce."
    Lastly, there is a practice he refers to as "Taco-snotting" and the more shocking "circle-snot."

    Good Lord. What is "Taco-snotting?"

    "Taco-snotting" is the term used by CmdrTaco to refer to the practice of sucking the penis of a homosexual man (or unwilling heterosexual; CmdrTaco is rumored to prefer rape), then blowing the semen out his nose onto his partner's (victim's) face and body. A long, bubbly stream of milky-white semen is left on CmdrTaco's face, dribbling out of his nose and down his cheek: hence the term, "Taco-snotting."
    A "circle-snot" is a Taco-snotting circle-jerk, another practice common among the Slashdot crew. CmdrTaco, CowboiKneel, and Homos get together and Taco-snot each other with their gooey, sticky cum -- spooging their jizz-snot all over each other's faces and pasty, white bodies, until they're covered head to toe with each other's man juice. This can go on for hours. For the homosexual penetration that follows this lengthy foreplay, Roblowme is usually there to provide plenty of anal lubricant; he owns a limo service and has ample supplies of motor oil and axle grease ready to go.
    To complete this perverted orgy, fellow geeks Michael, Timothy, and Jamie will usually join in, dressed in tight leather mock-S.S. uniforms, jack boots, and leather gloves. The whole group then proceeds to snot each other's spunk and whip each other's pudgy asses with riding crops and chains until their pale, white geek bodies are exhausted and soaked in stinking sweat from the hours of passionate, homosexual revelry.

    Ewwwwww. So, can I stop receiving these emails?

    Hopefully.
    You most likely forgot to uncheck the "Willing to Taco-snot" checkbox in your account preferences. CmdrTaco has probably already got the hots for your wad, and he's probably already been lurking outside your bathroom window for weeks with a camera, some tissues and lube. There's no escaping a geek in heat, so it's probably too late for you, but you can possibly rectify this situation. To remove yourself from CmdrTaco's sights, log into your Slashdot account, go to your user page, click on Messages, and uncheck the box next to "Willing to Taco-snot." Maybe he'll ignore you. Probably not.

    I can't stop receiving these emails from CmdrTaco!?

    If you indulge him in a Taco-snot or two, he might leave you alone. You might also want to look into mail filtering, restraining orders, or purchasing a heavy, blunt object capable of warding off rampaging homosexual geeks in heat. Trust me, when they charge... oh, the humanity. If he gets you, and you let him Taco-snot you, you will most likely end up tied up in his basement to be used as his sex slave for the rest of your life (or until he accidentally drowns you in spunk in a circle-snot).

    Have you ever been Taco-Snotted?

    Unfortunately, yes. I first met CmdrTaco at an Open Source Convention. He invited me back to his room for a game of Quake and some "gourmet Tacos," but when I got there, he jumped me and tied me to his bed, stripping me. After taking his "Commander" out of his pants, Mr. Taco made me suck the withered thing six times. He then performed his vile Taco-snotting ritual on me three times over the next two hours, bringing me to orgasm after sweaty, mind-numbing orgasm... then he snotted my own milky-white jizz back onto my face, into my mouth, then again on my exposed belly.
    CmdrTaco invited several of his Open Source (or rather, "Open Sauce" -- man sauce) buddies over to continue the twisted snotfest. Linux Torvalds raped my ass with his "monolithic kernel," and Anal Cox used his "network stack" in a multitude of unspeakable ways on and in every orifice in my defenseless body. Michael was there in his leather Nazi uniform, caning my ass with a bamboo pole and ranting about "all those Censorware freaks out to get him."
    How did you finally escape, you ask? After about 16 hours of countless homosexual atrocities perpetrated against my restrained body, they all finally went to sleep on top of me, sweat-soaked and exhausted. I was left there, covered in bubbly, translucent jizz-snot, chained to the bed, with half a dozen fat, pasty-white fags lying around and on top of me. Fortunately the spooge coating my flesh worked wonderfully as a lubricant; I was able to squirm my way out of the handcuffs and slip out the back door. I'm just glad I survived the ordeal. These geeks had a lot of built-up spunk in their wads -- I could've easily been drowned!

    That's horrible. Does "Taco-snotting" have anything to do with CmdrTaco's "special taco"?

    No, that's a different disgusting perversion CmdrTaco indulges himself in. CmdrTaco is usually not satisfied with merely snotting your own jizz back onto your face, he most often enjoys involving his own bodily fluids in his twisted games. WeatherTroll has spent some time trying to educate the Slashdot readership about this vile practice (emphasis added):
    You may be wondering what CmdrTaco's "special taco" is. You will be wishing that you hadn't been wondering after you finish reading this post. To make his "special taco", CmdrTaco takes a taco shell and shits on it. He then adds lettuce, jacks off on the taco, and adds a compound to make the person who eats the taco unconscious. Of course, the compound does not make the person unconscious until the taco is fully eaten. Thus CmdrTaco force-feeds the taco to the unsuspecting victim.
    After the victim is unconscious, he is held against his will and used for CmdrTaco's nefarious sexual purposes. This includes shoving taco shells up the victim's ass, Taco-snotting, and getting Jon Katz involved.
    Completely different, yet no less revolting. It should be clear to you now that CmdrTaco is a very, very sick individual, as are most of the Slashdot editors.

    Does Jon Katz get involved in any of this? I thought he was a paedophile, not a homosexual.

    Actually, Jon Katz is a homosexual paedophile. He's also a coprophiliac, and, many suspect, a zoophile. Jon Katz is somewhat of a loner and doesn't involve himself in circle-snots. Mr. Katz usually engages in a game called " Katz juicy-douching" with his harem of little-boy slaves: a vile practice which involves administering an enema to himself of the little boy's urine (forced out of them with a pair of pliers), spooging the vile muck from his ass back into the enema bag, then squirting and slathering the goo all over himself, and the little boy's chained-up and naked bodies. If he's in the mood, he will sometimes skip refilling the enema bag and just squirt it from his ass onto his boys. Unwilling boys are further tortured with the pliers until they comply and allow Mr. Katz to juicy-douche them for the rest of their lives.
    As I already said, Mr. Katz is also a zoophile. As if the sexual escapades with the helpless little boys aren't enough, Jon usually enjoys his juicy-douches best when his penis is firmly planted in a female goat's anus. He is also rumoured to get off on watching his little boys eat the goat's small, bean-like turds.

    ...Are you getting hard writing this?

    Why, yes. :) Join me in a WIPO-snot?

    No, thanks. I'm already CmdrTaco's boi toi.

    ________________________________________
    READER COMMENTS

    1. Fucking hilarious too bad it didnt get a 5:Funny (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.12.02 19:01 (#2644105)

      this is good shit man

    2. Re:Taco-snotting@Home! (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by Dark_Cobra87 on 2001.12.01 23:03 (#2642180)

      Oops, forgot to check that Taco-snot option...

    3. Re:Fuck Linux! Fuck him hard! (Score:-1)
      by Fecal Troll Matter on 2001.12.01 20:55 (#2641791)

      Mmmmmmm, Taco Sauce...

      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)

    4. Look (Score:-1)
      by ArchieBunker on 2001.12.01 20:19 (#2641679)

      I love trolling but this shit is getting old, fast. At least start mixing them up a little bit. How about the 'How OSM was Freed' series?
      http://www.naawp.org/

    5. Re:Congratulations! You have been WIPO'd!! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.12.01 8:37 (#2640602)

      Stop posting this! I've got hangover and Taco Snotting doesn't make me feel any better.

      I'm really glad that Taco Snotting is illegal here in Europe.

    6. Re:Snot me baby, one more time! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.30 1:01 (#2634213)

      Get a life you loser! Don't you have anything better to do than insult CmdrTaco and the gay community? We are not perverts, we are human beings just like you. So give it a rest!

    7. Re:Hello, perdida!!! Won't you snot my face tonigh (Score:-1)
      by perdida on on 2001.11.27 14:13 (#2618764)

      Shut up you asshole.

      I am not great, I am merely adequate. I live in adequacy.

    8. Go back to Russia. (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.26 22:22 (#2616035)

      You weiner trool!

    9. Re:The Taco-Snotting FAQ Rides Again!! (Updated so (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.25 9:14 (#2609574)

      try to find a pic of actual "taco-snotting"! fucking funny it would be! so go to gay porn sites day in and day out until you find a man giving another man a blowjob that has jizz coming out of his nose and mouth. by the way, keep up the good work

    10. Re:Snotting another first!! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.23 12:18 (#2603370)

      WIPO, this is getting waaaay old, either drop it or revise it.... there've been no updates for days now...

      CmdrTaco

    11. Re:It's Taco SPAM!!! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.22 17:28 (#2600815)

      A truly excellent and very humourous troll indeed!
      However...

      To complete this perverted orgy, fellow geeks Michael, Timothy, and Jamie often join in, dressed in black Gestapo uniforms, jack boots, and leather gloves.

      Black GeStaPo uniforms? The GeStaPo (Geheime Staatspolizei - Secret State Police) wore civilian clothes (although there are reports on them occasionally using Allgemeine SS uniforms in occupied territories).

      I seriously doubt that perverted individuals like CmdrTaco et al would have the good taste to ever wear the outstandingly beautiful black Waffen SS uniforms! Please update the FAQ accordingly.

      • Re:It's Taco SPAM!!! (Score:0)
        by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.23 4:06 (#2602610)

        Actually, it appears you are both wrong!! Ah ha!! I think our boy WIPO was thinking of the Allgemeine SS uniforms. Waffen SS were grey.

    12. Re:Microsoft's Taco-Snotting Connection (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.21 4:49 (#2594325)

      oh yeah, you say you have masturbated only 2 times to this post. well, by the time it takes for me to get through reading it, i usually end up masturbated 5 to 6 times, 10 to 12 if i have the goatse.cx homepage loaded up and am looking at it side by side with the slashdot page. my keyboard, hands, mouse, monitor, the underside of my desk and around the floor under my desk are cum soaked and sticky with the man smell i know and love.

    13. Re:Microsoft's Taco-Snotting Connection (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.21 4:41 (#2594311)

      for version 2 you should make a total re-write of the cod...errr...text and add some details about cmdrtaco and the homo-gang's happenings with their coworkers (osdn?) and all of the gay revelry they enjoy and promote. by the way, did i just see cmdrtaco on television promoting the nax hair removal system? i guess after using vaseline in and around his ass he grew quite a ponytail and it had to be removed somehow...ouch!

    14. Re:Microsoft's Taco-Snotting Connection (Score:-1, Troll)
      by TRoLLaXoR on 2001.11.21 3:59 (#2594191)

      WIPO, do you notice how few comments you get for anything you write/post/spam nowadays?

      -Trollaxor

    15. Jon-Katz docking (Score:-1)
      by sales_worldwide on 2001.11.20 11:53 (#2588488)

      You forgot to mention Jon Katz's "docking" games, where he places his chopper head to head with another chap, and rolls the other guys foreskin over his own circumcised end ("docking"), providing him with fantasies of actually having his own forskin ...
      "Making linux GPL was the best thing I ever did" - Torvalds. I'd hate to see the worst thing...

    16. Re:Snotting a first! (Score:-1)
      by Fucky the troll on 2001.11.20 11:28 (#2588446)

      Woah! When did the WIPO troll get freed? And how the fuck did I miss it?

      Excellent FP, sir.

      This is a sig virus. Please put me in your sig

    17. Re:Snotting a first! (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.20 11:04 (#2588407)

      omg that is crapflooding material if i ever saw it!!!!!! and u got a first post!!!! whoot to the wipo troll!!!

    18. GW, please.... (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.19 9:03 (#2583756)

      GW...you know we love every hair on your 27 acre ass... and I, for one, would never do anything untowards your graceful demeanor. And you probably have several friends that would love to help you do the bear dance all over my face if I so much as spelled your name wrong. And you know I'd defend your Constitutional right to defame God in heaven. I'd even help fund your education, should you ever decide to take that route. Hell, I'd buy you a tall tepid bear-whiz beer if you were here with me, right now!

      But. ...if you can't find another topic, I'm gonna step over your dead mother's grave and kick your assuredly anesthetitized butt clear across the playground.

      Now go stick your shaved head back down inside the woman's toilet, and just to show there's no hard feelings, I'll jump in the tow-truck and drive right over to help you pull it right out...ok?

      thanks

    19. Re:Help me Taco-Snotters!! (Score:-1)
      by mark knopfler 69 on 2001.11.19 8:25 (#2583695)

      I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU SIR. FOR ONE THING, THE E-MAIL FROM CMDRTACO DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH GRAMMATICAL AND SPELLING MISTAKES. Let's be realistic here, CmdrTaco usually types with one hand, and since he is shaking from jacking off his aim on the keyboard isn't too good. Those e-mails were a little too well written. Sorry boy, you'll have to do better.

    20. Re: What the hell is "taco snotting"? (Score:-1)
      by WeatherTroll on 2001.11.19 8:14 (#2583667)

      You should update this to say VA Software instead of VA Linux.

    21. YOU ARE WINNER (Score:1)
      by smackmonkey on 2001.11.19 7:06 (#2583510)

      Crackhead moderators: this is +5, Hilarious material.

      --
      CNN declares War on Islam!
      Left-wing America declares War on its Civil Liberties!

    22. Re:On Taco-Snotting 1.9 (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.19 5:40 (#2583336)

      This was funny the first 100 times. Now it is getting boring!

    23. Digusting and Shameful (Score:-1)
      by egg troll on 2001.11.18 22:27 (#2582054)

      Having masturbated *twice* to this post, I'm still incredibly aroused! Come over for a Taco Snot. I'll be wearing my crotchless Clifford the Big Red Dog outfit!!

      For more info check out this /. article

    24. IMPROVE THE FAQ (Score:-1, Flamebait)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.18 12:03 (#2580822)

      add more links to goatse and to cowboineal's site to make it better. a link to rotten.com would be nice too

      • Re:IMPROVE THE FAQ (Score:0)
        by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.18 12:18 (#2580832)

        and a link to michael's site and to jon katz's site if he has one and homo's site. i dont know what else to say. maybe a few links to phallic.org they have nice penis pictures! a link to the planet quake site or whatever. really make the reader feel this faq really answers their questions. oh yeah, and when you talk about cmdrtaco snotting you, say he brought you to "orgasm after sweaty orgasm". describe it more is all i'm saying. and use more italics and bolding! and when you talk about jon katz shitting or whatever have a link to fecal japan on rotten.com

        other wise a great job wipo troll! keep up the good work!

    25. Re:CmdrTaco's filthy secret! (Score:-1)
      by Wil Wheaton on 2001.11.18 6:41 (#2580438)

      Hi. Let's be buddies.. butt buddies.
      --
      WIL WHEATON DOT NET

    26. WIPO speaks the truth (Score:-1)
      by dead_puppy on 2001.11.18 5:33 (#2580342)

      Here is an e-mail I received a week ago:

      From: malda@slashdot.org
      To: puppy_dead@hotmail.com
      Subject: were where you last friday? :(

      I thought we where supposed to meet at Backdoor's at 8-ish, sugar-lips? You could've at least told me that you could'nt make it! I was even in my favorite pink skirt for you, honey-cup... next time, you could be more considarite and tell me you cant come... bastard.

      --
      CmdrTaco (malda@slashdot.org)
      You finding Ling-Ling's head?

    27. Taco snotting is WRONG!!! (Score:-1)
      by Big_Ass_Spork on 2001.11.18 4:53 (#2580300)

      I do it wrong

      Laying here in the shadows of my room, I squint up at my love. My Ms. Portman. I am sore and tired after fucking her for eight solid hours. My chapped and aching dick is soaking in grits to relieve the pain. She gets on her knees and starts lapping the grits up out of the bowl. She places her beautiful hands on my penis and starts to lick the grits off my achy piece.

      Massaging my nutsack she....

      WAIT, I DO IT WRONG!!!!

      Yanking my dick out of her mouth I throw her to the ground and shove it in to her gaping freshly fisted ass. [goatse.cx]

      "OH BIG ASS SPORK!! Fuck my ass, fuck my ass good. DEEPER, my stallion, deeper!! Make a Beowulf cluster of sperm on my back!!"

      "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of this baby!"

      I DO IT WRONG!!!!

      ---
      All your Sporks are belong to Big_Ass_Spork! What you say?! All your Sporks are belo... forget it...

    28. Rob Malda Dead at age 25! (Score:-1)
      by j0nkatz on 2001.11.17 22:54 (#2579596)

      I just heard some sad news on the radio -- famous queerbait Rob Malda was found dead in his Holland home this morning. The details were a bit hazy, but it seems that he drowned in jizz while Taco Snotting his friend Hemos. I'm sure everyone in the /. community will miss him -- even if you didn't enjoy his queer antics and boring ass website, there's no denying his contributions to the homosesual cultural development, particularly in the areas of Taco snotting. Truly an American icon.

      I wanna Open Source sex so it won't be worth a shit either.

    29. TACO-SNOTTING is really Donkey-Punching (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.15 6:38 (#2567601)

      No no no, the correct term for that is "donkey-punch". I have eye-witnessed this amazing eye-popping event demonstrated on unsuspecting hose-monsters by my frat brothers in the past.. . :-)

    30. Re:the effect of knowlege laws... (Score:1)
      by AbsoluteRelativity on 2001.11.15 5:31 (#2567457)

      The WIPO Troll
      Slashdot and the Karma Lottery - News for uber monkeys, by uber monkeys.

    31. Re:Taco-Snotting (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.13 9:27 (#2557632)

      Oh, man that's just sick !

    32. HOW DO I GET AN ANONYMOUS PROXY? (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.13 9:03 (#2557604)

      TELL ME WHERE I CAN GET AN ANONYMOUS proxy please WIPO Troll. Maybe later i will join you in a snotting at my place. ;P

    33. Re:Taco-Snottage!?!?!? (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by vikool on 2001.11.13 7:43 (#2557495)

      what is this bull shit,i feel offened that some people feel so so senseless to post stuff like these esp when such a tragic incident has occured

    34. Re:Taco-felching!! (Score:-1)
      by I.T.R.A.R.K. on 2001.11.11 22:38 (#2551890)

      Where the fuck do I sign up?!

      - I throw rocks at retarded kids

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    35. Re:Taco-felching!! (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.11 21:53 (#2551753)

      this shit is hilarious..keep up the good work.

    36. Re:Taco-felching!! (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by rockwood on 2001.11.11 21:49 (#2551746)

      OMG! That is the most disgusting thing I have ever heard! WHo in their right mind would sit down and waste the time to construct such a replusive story. I guess I'll be skipping lunch and dinner today.. and possibly tomorrow also. The game doesn't affect reality. Reality affects the game.

    37. Re:Ban this! It's disgusting!! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.11 14:43 (#2550701)

      dude, this is crap-flood material if i ever saw it.
      duuuuuuuuudddddddddddddeeeeeeeee.

    38. Re:Taco-Snotting = HATE SPEECH (Score:-1, Flamebait)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.11 8:16 (#2550266)

      horny_rob_6969@hotmail.com

      Ah, so that's what the alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.horny-rob newsgroup is about!

    39. MOD THIS UP PLEASE!!! (Score:-1)
      by egg troll on 2001.11.11 5:34 (#2550024)

      +5, Arousing

      For more info check out this /. article

    40. Re:Taco-Snotting = HATE SPEECH (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.11 4:39 (#2549891)

      WINNER>

    41. Re:Taco-Snotting = HATE SPEECH (Score:-1, Offtopic)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.11 4:37 (#2549887)

      I love you. Why do you use your bitchslapped account, rather than signing up for a new account to post at +1 before getting bitchslapped by the censors here? I guess I should speak for myself, but I don't want to log out and lose all my slashdot customization properties, nor do I want to lose my 50 karma yet.

    42. Re:On Taco-Snotting (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on 2001.11.09 9:19 (#2542412)

      you fucking rock! right down to the expanded cvs id!

      WIPO trolls > linux

    ________________________________________

    $Id: tacosnotting.html,v 1.12 2001/12/02 20:07:02 wipo Exp $
    --

    J. Wipo Troll, Esq.
    Crapflooder Associates
    Slashdot.org

  7. Lack of support in Canada too by velkro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I asked both AT&T and Bell about multicast - both indicated that thier backbones do not support multicast... and they don't seem to have plans to enable it anytime soon.

  8. Multicasting, the MBone, et al. by jd · · Score: 3, Interesting
    First, if you ask on the MBONE mailing list for a feed, they'll tell you to go to your ISP, and that if -they- don't support it, well, tough.


    Then, if you go to your ISP, and you're VERY lucky, they'll tell you to go to the MBONE mailing list. Most ISPs I've talked to just tell you to go to hell.


    The conclusion I came to is that the existing multicast structure that exists (which is all native PIM, or near enough) is controlled and run by a Royal Priesthood, and only The Worthy (and very rich) can pay a tithe great enough to appease the Net Gods.


    (UUNET is a great example. Sure, they'll provide multicast! Provided you pay $10,000+, for a high-speed link. For the cheaper nodes? No f* way! Peasents don't deserve such technology!)


    Given this attitude, can you SERIOUSLY wonder why the less-knowledgable view technology with suspicion? It's not exactly as though they're being encouraged to see it as a powerful friend.


    Getting on with the question of "is it expensive?" The correct answer is "no - unless your admin charges $100,000 per character typed".


    For those who want to convince their admins to enable multicasting, but wish to use less force than a Daisy Cutter, here are the simple instructions to set things up:

    • Enable multicasting and multicast routing in the kernel. If you wish to use PIM, also enable PIM-1 and/or PIM-2.
    • Recompile the kernel, install, and reboot.
    • On reboot, you'll now see additional messages, informing you that multicast routing is present. You'll also see an protocol listed (IGMP), which is used for communicating group information between multicast sites.
    • So far, so good. For most computers, all you need to is add the multicast group address to the routing table, like so: route add -net 224.0.0.0 netmask 240.0.0.0 dev eth0 (or whatever device you're using)
    • To check that this is working, ping the network address like so: ping -c 2 224.0.0.1. All multicast-enabled computers on your LAN should respond, with their OWN address, not the multicast group address.
    • On the machine to be used as a router, you need to do two more steps. You need to enable packet forwarding (which, if it's being used as a router, will already be done. DUH!)
    • The router will also need EITHER multicast routing enabled in the router software (if the option exists), OR a software router such as PIMD, MROUTED, or GATED 5.0. (I strongly advise AGAINST GATED. It's closed-source, the development cycle was suspicious, the cost is phenominal, and it really does nothing that the other, free (in all senses) software can't do anyway.)


    And that is it! The sum total of the arcane art of multicasting.


    Those who are used to games are probably much more familiar with broadcasting, as very very few games use multicasting. Multicasting would be useful for games, as it would seriously reduce the network load, but as network games are typically server-based, rather than distributed, there's really nothing to multicast, right now.


    The Internet backbone is, essentially, entirely multicast-ready. There is no "virtual" network of tunnels, any more, but rather one multicast cloud, which the ISP merely has to belong to. The main reasons ISPs don't join are as follows:

    • There's very little software that uses it, so there's nothing to promote it with.
    • There's next to zero information on it, making tech support a hazardous occupation for mom & pop ventures.
    • There's very little demand for it, because most services which would be ideal over multicast (eg: streaming audio/video) is all done over unicast. There's therefore absolutely no incentive for users to look any further.
    • It's impossible for advertisers and servers to exploit financially, as there's no means of telling how many people are accessing the service. There's ONE output stream, regardless of the number of people receiving.
    • The Internet backbone providers aren't keen on Joe & Jane Q Public using multicasting, as there are very few multicast addresses available. The addressing (for IPv4, anyway) could not support an explosion of interest in multicasting.
    • Cable companies are not going to provide a service which seriously competes with their own regular TV service. They may be stupid, but they're not crazy.
    • Microsoft provides only a crippled multicast service with Windows (no multicast routing, and no multicast loopback), so software shops that gear to Microsoft OS' tend not to bother with it.
    • Because multicasting is done over dynamic addresses, you can't filter it's content, making it utterly repugnant to virtually all governments.
    • There are no certifications in multicast technology, making it a valueless skill for students or employees to learn. If it can't be quantified or evaluated, employers are generally uninterested.
    • Multicasting is the Internet's last, best-kept secret. The moment the prawn industry cottons onto the fact that they can stream explicit video to many more people, for far less money on their part, in a way that cannot be blocked without blocking multicasting entirely, is the moment that the entire political, legal and religious scenes become irrelevent. (As if they weren't, already.) This would drive not so much as the final nail into the coffin of control, but it would throw in a 30-tonne stake for good measure.


      THESE are the reasons multicasting isn't in general, wide-spread use, not the cost (there isn't one), and not the complexity (there isn't any).

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  9. ISP peering agreements and multicast. by kbyrd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I attended a conference (Stardust) several years
    ago and at one of the discussion groups several
    ISPs were involved. A common concern was how
    to charge and be charged by their peers for
    multicast traffic.
    Simple Example:
    ISP A and B peer with each other, the ship bits
    both directions all month long. At the end of
    the month, they settle up. With unicast traffic,
    the number of bits comming over the peering
    connection coorosponds to the number of bits
    shipped inside a given ISPs network.
    With multicasting, A send a single multicast
    stream to B, but B has to repeat it at several
    points to get it to various dial-up and broadband
    POPs and the customers connected to those POPs.
    A can send a single stream which cause much more
    load on Bs network.

    1. Re:ISP peering agreements and multicast. by Nemosoft+Unv. · · Score: 1

      This point is practically moot, since even if A sends a multicast to B, once it arrives at B it only needs to be redistributed on B's local network, which doesn't cost them a single penny more in their peering contract.

      In fact, if A and B support proper multicast it will save them bits, because if A has an interesting broadcast and 10 listeners from B want to hear it, they have to transmit it only once from A to B, not 10 times.

      --
      "Fix it? It has been disintegrated, by definition it cannot be fixed!" - Gru in Despicable Me.
    2. Re:ISP peering agreements and multicast. by kbyrd · · Score: 2

      It's not quite moot. It depends on what you mean by "B's local network". Imagine an national ISP with either has their own long-haul links between POPs or piggy-backs on someone else's links between POPs. A can ship B one bit that needs to be duplicate to (potentially) many POPs those long-haul lines can be a limited resource.

      My point was that ISPs were confused about how multicasting and how it affected thier current price/revenue models.

    3. Re:ISP peering agreements and multicast. by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      However, had the same bit been transfered without multicast, it would have been sent once for each of those links and the _same_ amount of traffic would have been generated on ISP B's local network. The only reduction (in your example) is for the link between A and B.

      I can see how it would be difficult to inter-charge for this, but its not that difficult to track memberships of multicast addresses and log how many of your users you're going to send the packet to.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  10. sprintlink & broadcast.com by akb · · Score: 2

    From the Sprintlink multicast page "... all SprintLink customers can request to have multicast services enabled, completely free of charge."

    Sprintlink sells t1 - OC48, no consumer services. But if your ISP peers with them that's one less excuse they have not to give it to you. I still wouldn't hold my breath.

    Last I knew broadcast.com attempted to stream its content over multicast and reported a 5% success rate. They're big enough to use this as a ballpark figure for the percentage of the 'net that has multicast (which is pretty sad imho). They have a list of their multicast affiliates, ISP's that can receive multicast events and programming.

    1. Re:sprintlink & broadcast.com by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      When you consider how efficient multicast is for broadcasting of live event video and audio and/or for peer discovery (such as a non-centralised-server based P2P package), its a shame networks don't support it.

      All things considered, I was unaware until the last year or so how poorly multicast was supported on the Internet. I must admit that I've come across very little good documentation or code examples in my travels either although I've come up with quite a few.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  11. chicken and egg by Bullhead · · Score: 1

    thing is the whole multicast thing is a bit chicken and egg at the mo.

    ISP's, although they are playing with it in the backbones and some have fully multicast enabled backbones have no real need to roll it down to the end user because there aren't any (many) apps/broadcasts out there that use it!

    And content providers don't bother multicasting content as the software isn't up to scratch and the ISP's don't support it down to the customer network.

    Then there is the issue that even if the ISP supported it down to the customer network that most customer networks aren't setup for multicast on a LAN level. Might not be an issue having an extra E1/T1 of broadcast trffic on most LAN's but some people wouldn't be too happy about it.

    At present in the UK's major peering point more than 20 isp networks exchange multicast traffic (about 20% of total members). Which is a start...

    Also new developments are under way in the addressing and management technology behhind multicast. In particular PIM-SSM (source specific multicast) that allows requests to be made on source,group (S,G) broadcast rather than just anyone,group (*,G) will change the way multicast can be used on the internet, as unicast addresses will become the decriminater for the group. This gives each broadcaster many multicast groups to broadcast too unlike the 255 addresses AS's get now.

    Again though this requires IGMPv3 which i don't think will be making an apperance in any M$ IP stack anytime soon!

    Bottom line is the technology rocks but the current financial climate seems to have put projects like multicast on a back burner...