Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
1–10 of 107 posts
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#2Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#3Is this in response to the Skype IP Lookup tool that was released this past week? Or something completely unrelated?
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#4Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#5Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#6I guess Skype (by extension, Microsoft) is growing interested in what people are speaking about. To get hold of that data you need to route it through your own network, at significant processing and bandwidth cost.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#7Is this in response to the Skype IP Lookup tool that was released this past week? Or something completely unrelated?
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#8Let me just make this very clear: you don't go from zero operating cost to multiple millions of hardware and colo space to do the very same thing, in a move so transparent that it needs security researchers to dig into your program to find out it has happened at all. I guess Skype (by extension, Microsoft) is growing interested in what people are speaking about. To get hold of that data you need to route it through y…
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#9Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#10Let me just make this very clear: you don't go from zero operating cost to multiple millions of hardware and colo space to do the very same thing, in a move so transparent that it needs security researchers to dig into your program to find out it has happened at all. I guess Skype (by extension, Microsoft) is growing interested in what people are speaking about. To get hold of that data you need to route it through y…
a) datacenter bandwidth is now much cheaper than it was 10 years ago, to the point that the cost saving from using p2p is not that significant anymore. (Skype did not have zero operating cost, and contrary to the article, they did operate their own supernodes - few tens to a few hundreds at least).
b) Microsoft is going to change the business model, e.g. no more free calls (or, no more free conference calls, or something like that), and if they are going to charge money, they need to guarantee a level of service - which they cannot with a P2P infrastructure.
c) The marginal cost for Microsoft (who already have data centers etc) is actually LOWER than running a p2p, with everything (including end user liability) is taken into account. Running 10,000 servers in existing data servers would cost ~$1M/month. May seem a lot to you, but it's a rounding error for microsoft (and certainly, at a $8.5B total cost, 4 years would make this ~$8.55B from Microsoft's side. Rounding error)
d) Microsoft is planning some kind of integration with their other properties (hotmail? live? office live?) for which hosting everything is essential.
I would guess (c) or (d), although the parent's guess is not without merit.