1TB is not enough for Internet Radio, it's not even enough for most podcasts.
The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
11–20 of 30 posts
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#12I own and operate Broadcastify.com, which is arguably the largest icecast implementation in the world. We've been using 100TB.com for our audio streaming infrastructure, which is a softlayer reseller. I've been unable to find anyone else that provides better pricing for bandwidth than they do. All of our Web infrastructure, provisioning, archiving, etc is spread between AWS and Google Cloud though. Audio broadcasting…
How does 100TB.com beat Hetzner? Their $5 virtual server comes with 2TB whereas Hetzner offers 20TB.
I don't know - but I'm not deploying infrastructure on $5 virtual servers that are marketed and designed to support a personal blog.
Paying 200-300/month for 100TB of data transfer on a dedicated host is where I'm at with 100TB.com
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#13Ha too funny! I haven't heard the name Icecast in a long time. I know the guys who created Icecast. They did it because they wanted to run a radio station but according to them Shoutcast sucked, so they rewrote it from scratch as open source.
The reason it is called Icecast is because it was replicating the Shoutcast protocol, so that people with Winamp could play Icecast streams (Nullsoft made both Winamp and Shoutcast). The Shoutcast protocol used what were called ICY responses (which stood for I Can Yell) so they called their Icecast since it made ICY responses too.
This post unlocked that little corner of my memory. Fun!
ps. One of the Icecast guys worked on Ogg Vorbis because he thought that "mp3 sucked" and the other one is now a professor of Computer Science at USC.
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#14> A single user listening to a 128kbps stream, non-stop for a month, would use about 300GB of transfer. Just one user!
Is that how broadcasting works on the internet?
Is there not a more efficient non-proprietary protocol for broadcasting on the internet?
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#15I own and operate Broadcastify.com, which is arguably the largest icecast implementation in the world. We've been using 100TB.com for our audio streaming infrastructure, which is a softlayer reseller. I've been unable to find anyone else that provides better pricing for bandwidth than they do. All of our Web infrastructure, provisioning, archiving, etc is spread between AWS and Google Cloud though. Audio broadcasting…
Can you not move to using SoftLayer directly? The closest page IBM has to something like a sales page is unclear.
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#16128 Kbps would amount to 30-40 GB monthly So, digitalocean gives you ~30 users capacity? I think hetzner offers 1Gbit internet without quota which would serve thousands of users.
I always thought that online media services used multicast protocols, that is, after the initial point to point connection all data packets should be transmitted once, then replicated at router level for every subscribed user. If that's the case, 30 users seems a pretty low number since it would translate into maximum 30 concurrent connections while the generated traffic from the server point of view would be just sl…
That was the idea once upon a time[1], but it's been dead for ages.
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#171TB is not enough for Internet Radio, it's not even enough for most podcasts.
Hosting is easy, it's still the transit that'll kill ya.
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#18> A single user listening to a 128kbps stream, non-stop for a month, would use about 300GB of transfer. Just one user! Is that how broadcasting works on the internet? Is there not a more efficient non-proprietary protocol for broadcasting on the internet?
bittorrent
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#19> A single user listening to a 128kbps stream, non-stop for a month, would use about 300GB of transfer. Just one user! Is that how broadcasting works on the internet? Is there not a more efficient non-proprietary protocol for broadcasting on the internet?
I remember some years ago that people were pirating radio stations through a peer-to-peer streaming client, but I can't remember what it was called and I never looked at the internals.
Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station
#20> A single user listening to a 128kbps stream, non-stop for a month, would use about 300GB of transfer. Just one user! Is that how broadcasting works on the internet? Is there not a more efficient non-proprietary protocol for broadcasting on the internet?
I remember some years ago that people were pirating radio stations through a peer-to-peer streaming client, but I can't remember what it was called and I never looked at the internals.
I was thinking more about something at the same level as TCP/IP.