Slashdot Mirror


EU Funds P2P-Based Internet TV Standard

oliderid writes to let us know that, even as the UK threatens ISPs who don't clamp down on P2P traffic, the rest of the EU is going the other way. (Here is a link with a a bit more technical detail.) Europe recently agreed to: "...spend 14M Euros to create a standard way to send TV via the Net. The project will create a peer-to-peer system that can pipe programs to set-top boxes and home TV sets. It will be based on the BitTorrent technology. The four-year research project will try to build a system that can stand alongside the other ways that broadcasters currently get programs to viewers."

3 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. P2P? by Corpuscavernosa · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comcast just had a heart attack.

    --
    We figured out a long time ago that it's easier to elect seven judges than to elect 132 legislators.
    1. Re:P2P? by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well Comcast doesn't do business in the EU.
      Second I was involved in tv project in an EU country. They could have purchased out software for $8000 a copy so there total cost would have been under $100,000. Instead they spent six million dollars to write their own. It didn't work so they paid us to come over there and tell them what they did wrong. I think we made more money than if they had just bought the software to start with.
      So I would put that down to "We will see."

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  2. Re:How does this compare? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Server --> Users --> Users in the 'bittorrent' model will stress the infrastructure far less. BT selects closer sources preferentially, so fewer long distance connections will be required, indicating less traffic on the backbone routes. There will be spikes in local routes, of course, but those will be transient and less likely to cause major impacts to the overall infrastructure, given that the routes will be tied up for a far shorter time than the traditional server --> client method would use.

    Also, there will be less of a bottleneck on the server side, so the infrastructure will have to handle far fewer 'busy' connection attempts--lowering overhead is important.

    I would note that those who are kvetching the loudest about not having enough bandwidth seem to be those who wish to offer 'traditional'-style server --> client streaming as a premium service. Everyone has a motive--so look for why the squeaky wheel is squeaking before you apply the grease.

    --
    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure dome decree