By Topic

A comparative study of multicast protocols: top, bottom, or in the middle?

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

4 Author(s)
Li Lao ; Comput. Sci. Dept., California Univ., Los Angeles, CA, USA ; Jun-Hong Cui ; Gerla, M. ; Maggiorini, D.

Multicast solutions have been evolving from "bottom" to "top", i.e., from IP layer (called IP multicast) to application layer (referred to as application layer multicast). Recently, there are some new proposals (named as overlay multicast) using certain "infrastructure" (composed of proxies) in the middle. Although it is well accepted that application layer multicast and overlay multicast are easier to deploy while sacrificing bandwidth efficiency compared with IP multicast, little research has been done to systematically evaluate and compare their performance. In this paper, we conduct a comparative study of different types of multicast routing protocols. We first present a qualitative comparison of three types of protocols, and then we provide a quantitative study of four representative protocols, namely, PIM-SSM, NARADA, NICE, and POM by extensive simulations. Our studies will help to answer some of the most important questions, such as which way to go: top, bottom, or in the middle?.

Published in:

INFOCOM 2005. 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings IEEE  (Volume:4 )

Date of Conference:

13-17 March 2005