IP Multicast over Cable TV Networks

  • A. Selcuk Uluagac
  • Jon M. Peha
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2816)


When a cable TV network that provides Internet access is connected to multiple ISPs, there are instances where multicast does not work or works inefficiently. This paper identifies causes of these problems, and proposes solutions, demonstrating that it is possible to provide efficient multicast with any of the architectures under consideration. In addition, the de facto industry standard for data transmission over cable networks, DOCSIS TM , guarantees that a cable company will have the ability to block certain multicast traffic (such as traffic generated by Internet television broadcasters which compete with the cable company’s core business.) This paper describes how an ISP can circumvent this. Under the assumption that there is a significant amount of multicast traffic, we show thatcable companies and ISPs would be motivated to provide multicast services in all cases, but there are cases where they are not motivated to choose an efficient approach. Finally, we consider the impact of possible regulation that prohibits cable companies from blocking. In cases where this regulation has any impact, it can increase or decrease the cost of multicast services.


Passive Mode Multicast Service Cable Network Multicast Packet Multicast Traffic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Jinzenji, H., Hagishima, K.: Real-time audio and video broadcasting of IEEE GLOBECOM 1996 over the Internet using new software. IEEE Communications Magazine 35(4), 34–38 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    MediaChannel: Your Daily Guide to Internet Television & Video. MediaChannel,
  3. 3.
    Gunzerath, D.: Radio and the Internet. The National Association of Broadcasters (May 5, 2000),
  4. 4.
    Careless, J.: Digital Television-JumpTV Fights For Retransmission. Digital Television. com (Jun 1, 2001),
  5. 5.
    Broadband Subscriber Count Nears 20 Million - December 2002.’ Kinetic Strategies Inc. Cable Datacom News (December 1, 2002),
  6. 6.
    FCC Approves AOL-Time Warner Merger. The Federal Communications Commission Media Bureau (October 25, 2001),
  7. 7.
    Federal Communications Commission. Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming. Ninth Annual Report, FCC Docket MB 02-145 (December 31, 2002) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mark, R.: Cox Begins Its First Open Access Broadband Trials. (November 6, 2001),
  9. 9.
    Grice, C.: AT&T to test open access to ISPs. CNET (June 7, 2000),
  10. 10.
    Joyce, E.: AT&T, Comcast Commit to ISP Access. (April 1, 2002),
  11. 11.
    Ingebretsen, M., Siegel, M.: Cable slouches toward open access. IEEE Spectrum 38(4), 74–79 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Menard, D., Denton, T.: Third Party Access to Cable Modems in Canada. Written for the FCC Open Access NOI, Docket No. 00-185, Version 2.0 (December 1, 2000) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    CableLabs ≤ CertifiedTM Cable Modems Technical Specifications. The CableLabs® Certified Cable Modem project, DOCSIS (May 2002),
  14. 14.
    Olsen, S.: Battle brews over Web streaming. CNET (May 31, 2001),
  15. 15.
    Lemley, M.A., Lessig, L.: Written Ex Parte of Professor Mark. A. Lemley and Professor Lawrence Lessig In the Matter of Application of consent to the transfer of control of licenses MediaOne Group, Inc. to AT&T Corp, FCC CS Docket No. 99-251 (November 10, 1999) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Speta, J.B.: The Vertical Dimension of Cable Open Access. University of Colorado Law Review 71(4), 975–1010 (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hazlett, T.W., Bittlingmayer, G.: Open access: The ideal and the real. Telecommunications Policy 26(5-6), 219–359 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fellows, D., Jones, D.: DOCSIS TM cable modem technology. IEEE Communications Magazine 39(3), 202–209 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Majeti, V.C. (ed.): Cable modems: current technologies and applications. Intl. Engineering Consortium and Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Farber, D., Dukes, S.D., Laubach, M.E.: Delivering Internet Connections over Cable, Breaking the Access Barrier. Wiley Computer Publishing, John Wiley & Sons Inc. (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    O’Donnell, S.: Broadband Architectures, ISP Business Plans, and Open Access. In: Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (TPRC), Alexandria, VA, September 23-25 (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Laubach, M. E.: Comments on the Technical Ability to Implement Open Access Provisioning via High-Speed Data over Hybrid Fiber-Coaxial Cable Television Systems in the United States. Prepared for the White House National Economic Council (May 30, 1999),
  23. 23.
    Tseng, E.: A Capital Cost Model For Open Access Cable Networks. In: MIT Program on Internet & Telecoms Convergence Consortium (ITC), June 7, MIT, Cambridge (2000), Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tseng, E., Gillett, S.: Open Access to Cable Data Networks. MIT Program on Internet & Telecoms Convergence, ITC (2000),
  25. 25.
    AOL OK With Policy-Based Routing - FEB. 2001. Kinetic Strategies Inc. Cable Datacom. News (Febraury 1, 2001),
  26. 26.
    Fijolek, J.: Access Methods for Support of Multiple Internet Service Providers Over DOCSIS. CommWorks Corporation, a 3com Company, White Paper (June 4, 2000) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mamakos, L., et al.: A Method for Transmitting PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE). Internet Engineering Task Force Request for Comments 2516 (Febraury 1999),
  28. 28.
    Townsley, W., et al.: Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP). Internet Engineering Task Force Request for Comments 2661 (August 1999),
  29. 29.
    Black, U.D.: PPP and L2TP: remote access communications. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Deering, S., et al.: Internet Group Management Protocol. IGMP, version 3, Internet Engineering Task Force Request for Comments 3376 (October 2002) (proposed standard) Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    DOCSIS Radio Frequency Interface (RFI) Specification. The CableLabs Certified Cable Modem project (December 31, 2001),
  32. 32.
    Mukherjee, B., Sahasrabuddhe, L.H.: Multicast Routing Algorithms and Protocols: A Tutorial. IEEE Network 14(1), 90–102 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ramalho, M.: Intra- and Inter-Domain Multicast Routing Protocols: A Survey and Taxonomy. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 3 (First Quarter 2000),
  34. 34.
    Thaler, D., Estrin, D., Meyer, D.: Border Gateway Multicast Protocol (BGMP): Protocol Specification. IETF Draft (November 22, 2000) (work in progress),
  35. 35.
    DOCSIS Baseline Privacy Plus Interface (BPI+) Specification. CableLabs Certified Cable Modem project (March 1, 2002),
  36. 36.
    Wang, Q., Peha, J.M., Sirbu, M.: Optimal Pricing for Integrated-Services Networks. In: Internet Economics, pp. 353–376. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997), Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Selcuk Uluagac
    • 1
  • Jon M. Peha
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Electrical and Computer EngineeringCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations