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

The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

watsonsmith.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#21

Post by FDSGSG »

blantonl wrote: post #12
southerndrift wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> Paying 200-300/month for 100TB of data transfer

FWIW most providers can easily beat that. OVH in Canada offers good quality unmetered Gbit at below 100/mo with the hardware included.

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#22

Post by Nux »

pessimizer wrote: post #19
amelius wrote: post #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?

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.

Sopcast?

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#23

Post by buboard »

blantonl wrote: post #12
southerndrift wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

still a hetzner dedicated host would be as low as 25Euro/month and has unmetered 1Gbit which would be 324 TB . (i use them , but not affiliated - was just making calculations aloud)

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#24

Post by detaro »

squarefoot wrote: post #6
buboard wrote: post #3

128 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…

Some ISP-run and or company/network-internal ones do, but over the public internet there is no infrastructure for that, so the vast majority doesn't do it.

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#26

Post by oggadog »

buboard wrote: post #3

128 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.

Yeah that's roughly correct. I actually hadn't found hetzner when I was doing my initial research but it definitely looks like I should be moving over.

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#27

Post by yusyusyus »

detaro wrote: post #24
squarefoot wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Some ISP-run and or company/network-internal ones do, but over the public internet there is no infrastructure for that, so the vast majority doesn't do it.

funny enough.. my team probably killed off (one of anyway) the last tier 1 internet multicast deployments over the past few years.

Multicast has dataplane resource scaling issues and, frankly, CDN has become the solution to what multicast solves.

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#28

Post by utopian3 »

jedberg wrote: post #13

Ha 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 Shoutc…

Thanks for sharing this bit of history trivia! Had no idea about he origin of Icecast or Ogg

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#29

Post by oggadog »

jedberg wrote: post #13

Ha 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 Shoutc…

This was super interesting to find out, I always assumed that Icecast and Shoutcast were 'allies' or built by the same org. I've had a few things topple over during streaming but it seems that Icecast is the only one that's run without any issues, guess they proved their point!

Re: The tech behind building an independent, internet radio station

#30

Post by pessimizer »

Nux wrote: post #22
pessimizer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sopcast?

I dunno, but thanks for the recommendation.
Post reply on HN