3 ms·
It appears that it's currently lacking one important feature: a web peer that kicks off streaming right away. P2P can certainly lower the bandwidth requirement
by Osiris 15y ago
It appears that it's currently lacking one important feature: a web peer that kicks off streaming right away.
P2P can certainly lower the bandwidth requirements of the host, but for the user experience to be smooth, the video has to start right away and right now the live client appears to be taking a long time to establish connections with other peers. During that time, the user has to wait.
If the system would download from a dedicated web host in addition to peers, the experience would be much smoother, IMHO. Heck, you could even use the technology to enhance basically anything on the web by using the normal HTTP data stream, but also looking for peers with data from the same URL to increase download speed.
Right now it looks like you need a critical mass of clients viewing the video before it'll even work. I've been sitting on the video for about 5 minutes with any video appearing. My network connection shows several open connections from BTLive, but it's not sending or receiving any data.
- tete 15y agoMaybe this is interesting to you: http://swarmplayer.p2p-next.org/ http://swarmplayer.p2p-next.org/ The W3C also works on standards for P2P distribution. See: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-20080122/#network http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-20080122/#network
- synctext 15y agohttp://swarmplayer.p2p-next.org/ http://swarmplayer.p2p-next.org/ Hmm. Refers to Open Source live streaming software (LGPL). That Bittorrent Inc. solution breaks and is closed. How do they want to compete with mature PPLive code?
- k_bx 15y agoWhen I want to watch some sport event -- I don't care if it starts right away or in minute or two. Because often all the online-video channels are just over-loaded. So maybe something like this would solve the problem?
- brador 15y agoAgreed. I wouldn't shed a tear over a 30 second buffer.