Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

news.ycombinator.com

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#131
(Outside of niche circles like HN) Nobody uses computers anymore. Nobody is going to seed from their phone.

Plus instead of a million people all wanting to watch Spider-Man 2, those million people have infinite options of short videos or whatever to watch. The desire to watch A Specific Video isn’t what it used to be.

Times have changed and P2P as a common way of sharing stuff is dead to the average person.

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#132
post #17

This tech has been developed several times but ultimately CDNs are now so cheap that P2P is pointless. You can't ignore development cost since it dominates all other costs in this case.

If CDNs are so cheap, why is YouTube insistent that they should get paid for their bandwidth? I already pay for my bandwidth and am quite happy to use it for something like YouTube. The real reason is centralised architecture gives them control and ability to extract rent.

> why is YouTube insistent that they should get paid for their bandwidth?

What are you talking about?

YouTube has a lot more costs than bandwidth. And a lot of ads and Premium revenue goes to creators.

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#133
post #62

Part of the reason bit torrent works really well is that the file is downloaded in random order. It lets everyone cooperate, while still being robust to bad peers, bad network connections, churn etc. If you want live high quality streaming, a lot of reasons bit torrent works so well goes away. Latency matters. In bit torrent if the peer goes away, no big deal, just try again in 5 minutes with another peer, you are do…

If I remember correctly, PopcornTime was able to stream via BT. Your claims are mostly correct, but I think some compromises can be made to make BT clients streaming proof. For example: 1. locally-randomizing segments download order 2. Create a larger buffer 3. Prioritize parts coming from slower connections

I remember testing popcorn time and other bittorrent streaming tools back in the days. They worked "OK". Yes, you don't get the netflix experience. But on popular titles you get "good enough" streaming experience. You have to wait like 30 secs to get started.

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#134
> I was thinking most people nowaday have at least 30mbps upload

Even “modern” cities like NYC are limited to a MAXIMUM of 30Mbps upstream due to ISP monopolies and red tape.

It’s getting better, but Spectrum is still literally the only ISP available for many city residents, and their offerings are so lopsided that their highest-end package is a whopping 980/30.

That’s right. If you use the majority of that 980Mbps your IP overhead will gladly take that 30Mbps, leaving you with just about Zero headroom for anything else.

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#138
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are talking about a live stream (and not a stream of a static file), having the start be more seeded is useless.

mpeg stream / TS filetype / DVB-T/C/S broadcast IS static file, all 3 is same format, this format deals with every point you made... download specs and educate yourself. same with streaming audio, chunk IS static file, so every phone call you made last 30 years is static file.

The word "file" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

Re: Ask HN: Why is there no P2P streaming protocol like BitTorrent?

#140
post #62

Part of the reason bit torrent works really well is that the file is downloaded in random order. It lets everyone cooperate, while still being robust to bad peers, bad network connections, churn etc. If you want live high quality streaming, a lot of reasons bit torrent works so well goes away. Latency matters. In bit torrent if the peer goes away, no big deal, just try again in 5 minutes with another peer, you are do…

This comments on why bittorrent as is isn't used for live streaming, not why P2P shouldn't be used for live streaming > Latency matters. In bit torrent if the peer goes away, no big deal, just try again in 5 minutes with another peer, you are downloading in random order, who cares if one piecs is delayed 5 minutes. In a live stream your app is broken if it cuts out for 5 minutes. First of all, BitTorrent clients do n…

I have a relatively slow ADSL connection, it's not unusual for me to be able to download 100% of the file at say 95% the theoretical rate without uploading anything. If the network has enough upload capacity to do this, does it really need my upload? (Note my client is still there if somebody needs a rare block)

I remember some Bittorrent networks circa 2005 or so which tried to monitor you and punish you for not contributing and this was a disaster for me since my upload is necessarily a small fraction of my download. What I found is that kind of network seemed to perform poorly even when I had a good bidirectional connection. As I saw it, people who have the ability to upload more than they download are a resource that that kind of network can't exploit if everybody is forced to upload as much as they download.

Post reply on HN