Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 231 posts

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

#161

Post by [deleted] »

PaulHoule wrote: post #140
arghwhat wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 con…

[deleted]

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

#162

Post by jsnider3 »

Calwestjobs wrote: post #119
delusional wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If everybody starts at the start then it will be very poorly seeded when everybody wants it, before the being well seeded right when nobody needs it.

"well seeded" means what exactly? if i can send 2 copies of piece to 2 people immediately as i got it, then if my download takes 20 ms and sending it another 20 ms is it "well seeded" for those 3 people after 50 ms? or after how much time it is "well seeded" ?

Downloading and reuploading part of a file in 50 ms is optimistic and that is still only three people when serious live-streaming platforms have to deal with thousands of viewers routinely and millions every so often.

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

#163

Post by jkhanlar »

mikhailbolton wrote: post #139

BitTorrent Live did this, too: https://www.bittorrent.com/blog/2016/05/17/bittorrent-live-m...

yep, I was surprised nobody mentioned Bram Cohen's name yet. It was the first thing I thought of. Also see https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/BitTorrent_Live

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

#164

Post by calvinmorrison »

bawolff wrote: 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…

> Part of the reason bit torrent works really well is that the file is downloaded in random order.

That's basically true for one client (transmission) - who specifically refuses to allow linear ordering. Most clients implement this.

To enable it, its about a 3 sloc change.

I hate clients that dont work for the user.

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

#165

Post by arghwhat »

PaulHoule wrote: post #140
arghwhat wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 con…

You are not required to seed immediately, nor even the same asset. Unless the rules have changed, you would usually just be required to maintain a particular minimum seed lifetime ratio that is easily achieved by idle seeding a library.

The point is to ensure network health with a metric that is simple to understand and verify: that you have been a productive. If you aren't seeding, someone else has to pick up the slack and the network didn't benefit from you obtaining the blocks.

The community itself benefits by giving members a guarantee that stuff there is available with abundant bandwidth, instead of relying purely on the unpaid goodwill of others.

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

#166

Post by nottorp »

glxxyz wrote: post #159
nottorp wrote: post #149

The thing is, if you pirate why would you stream when you can download and watch at your convenience? And if you pay for the streaming, why would you donate your bandwidth to them? Would you get a discount?

"if you pirate why would you stream when you can download and watch at your convenience?" Live events, e.g. sports? "why would you donate your bandwidth to them?" I don't know but people donate bandwidth for torrents, maybe it's 'free' for them?

And? If you're into it, you already pay through the nose for those. Let them pay for the bandwidth.

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

#168

Post by apitman »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #106

For a while, I was CTO of a company called Livestation [0], which as the Wikipedia article states, was "originally based on peer-to-peer technology acquired from Microsoft Research". This P2P stack was meant to allow for mass scaling of lowish latency video streaming, even in parts of the World with limited peer bandwidth to original content source servers. The VC-1 format got into a legal quagmire, as most video str…

You bring up a good point. It's interesting that YouTube at least doesn't do p2p for their non-DRM content.

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

#169

Post by PotterSys »

There are companies doing something like that (StreamShark, Quanteec, Eyevinn; even Cloudflare with WHEP). On a company I worked on, they used Eyevinn for events with more than 100K users; and there were still performance issues.

Besides bandwidth problems (as you can't 100% rely on remote connections), any P2P solution would mean the same fragment will be shared many times between clients; something CDN networks have solved already (just serving content, instead of juggling with signalling)

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

#170

Post by fermentation »

earnesti wrote: post #133
Protostome wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Part of this was the fact you needed a pretty decent connection speed and that the files themselves were extremely compressed
Post reply on HN