Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Suggest P2P As Solution To Video Domination of The Internet
JPawlak writes "NewScientistTech reports that big businesses may be realizing the benefits of P2P technologies. Blizzard uses it to distribute patches for World of Warcraft, and now researchers at Microsoft are indicating internet users may have to use it to help distribute online video clips. The growing cost associated with delivering such content may be becoming prohibitive for some companies. 'The team also suggest a way to prevent Internet Service Providers' costs jumping when their users start uploading much more data. The trick is to allow sharing only between people with the same provider, when data transactions are free. That restriction would cut the pool of sharers into smaller groups, meaning MSN's servers would have to do more to fill any gaps in the service. But costs could still fall by more than half, simulations showed.'"
I have no problems at all with not for profit entities using some of my bandwidth to distribute their files.
I have serious problems with a for profit entity like Microsoft or Redhat doing the same.
The first one I call "charity" or "support". The second one I call "leaching", and its not far from "stealing".
If you're a for profit company and you can't afford bandwidth, then you need to find a new line of work. Don't expect your customers to give you freebies unless you're giving them something *good* in return, and something you're not also giving to those who don't share bandwidth.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
...how do you implement it? Browsers currently have absolutely no support for implementing anything like this. I'm not sure whether it can be done in Flash. Java is so heavyweight that it would probably scare off most people. ActiveX is a no-go. You can't make people install client software either - 99% will never bother to do that. Unless you can make it work out-of-the-box on browsers, it'll not become popular.
And how do you implement P2P streaming? All P2P protocols until now allow peers to send file pieces in non-streamable order.
I've used bittorrent effectively inside a corporate firewall for transmitting DVD images, especially because HTTP and FTP couldn't handle files larger than 2 Gigabyte easily. The security models aren't built in: authentication of the content remains a separate step. But transmitting DRM enabled files, such as Windows Media files for the BBC's well-publicized Iplayer project, seems a natural approach and would help prevent fakery of the files. (That's a big problem for PiratesBay and other Bittorrent sites.)
Especially when someone points to the idiots from Redmondia (and other places) that they should stop reinventing multicast again and again. The technology to do what is needed is there, the ability of ISPs to control it so that it is not detrimental to other users is also there. It has been there since the dawn on the Internet. And it is Multicast. From the viewpoint of network design and network operation theory, P2P is nothing, but an extremely lame sorry and sad excuse for Multicast emulation.
Implementing it is solely a matter of minor network tidy-up for most ISPs along with some software updates for the CE devices (where not supplied by the ISP).
By the way, the same methods which are used to control multicast are also valid for P2P services. TTL adjustment down to under 8 will usually cut down the traffic to be solely within an ISP while cutting it down to under 4 will cut it down so it stays within the same RAS device (2 for non-NAT setups). It is also trivial to deliver a correct setting on a per-ISP basis and to autodetect the necessary setting adjustment.
There is no rocket science here and no research to be done. All the tech is already out there. The problem is that the suppliers of P2P services and developers of P2P software deliberately do not want to do this. In fact, they are doing everything they can to steal more service than the ISP is willing to allocate to them. As a result the ISPs have no other choice but to love this and use a big stick to provide the luving to the customer.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Most ISP now like people to be on limited download limits per month, and charge for excess. If this takes off, the number of 'accidantal' overrtuns will potentially skyrocket, and profits will be up.
I wouldn't be surprised if the unlimited tag is removed completely so they can be sure of cashing in on this.
I'll happily use p2p if it fulfills four criteria
1: It's legal.
2: Its to my direct benefit (people who just leech being removed from the system).
3: My ISP won't try to ass rape my bank account each month with overuse charges.
4: Microsoft don't run the show.
If they manage that, no problem, if not, well then it'll be time for a new technology, won't it.