3 ms·
As a user, I block and personally hate those traffic leeches. They don't reduce streaming costs, they just push them onto unsuspecting users. I'll be billed for
by fxtentacle 6y ago
As a user, I block and personally hate those traffic leeches. They don't reduce streaming costs, they just push them onto unsuspecting users. I'll be billed for the additional upload by my ISP if I open their video on my phone. Plus the idea isn't even new. There have been streaming video BitTorrent clients implemented in Javascript for some years already.
As an admin, if anyone in my wifi opens a page using this technology, their increased upload traffic will slow down or potentially even block more important things like off-site backups.
That's why companies and universities tend to block p2p "CDN"s. Or at the very least, they heavily throttle it, which means your watching experience suffers.
- Anil1331 6y agoThis is not true. As a matter of fact many companies enable p2p cdn via eCDN to reduce network bottlenecks
- zbentley 6y agoMany companies push p2p CDNs for their online software products, on the premise that load on their edge servers/centralized CDN providers will be reduced if their users get data from peers. However, I believe GP was referring to companies blocking such CDNs on their internal networks (used by their employees). That corroborates my experience and that of my colleagues (healthcare, education, defense).
- fxtentacle 6y agoYes, I was talking about internal networks. And I have since remembered the name of the service that stumbled over this: veoh.com They were quickly blocked for using P2P in pretty much every company firewall. I remember sending a funny video link around, but nobody could watch it in their lunch break. Also, so many regular users reported their "Giraffic Video Accelerator" for suspicious behavior (high CPU usage, high network usage) that antivirus companies started flagging it as a Trojan. Then, Veoh went bankrupt. And eventually, they were acquired.