Hacker News Reader

Comment by dabeeeenster | Hacker News Reader

People use CDN's because they want increased quality of service.

I don't see how using p2p technology gives you a decent QoS.

If I told my clients (the large blue chips that ask about CDN's, anyway) that we won't be using Akamai, but instead will be relying on a brand new p2p network they would walk away laughing...

View on HN

i agree, but they will also want you to run a pilot to see how it goes.

Akamai is moving towards P2P CDN too. Not as a replacement to what they have, obviously, but still it's indicative of the overall trends in CDN segment.

Actually, the two companies I mentioned - Kontiki and Red Swoosh have amazing QOS. Bit Torrent sucks for that, but it is an engineering issue, not an architectural or conceptual one. Akamai actually acquired red swoosh, and is integrating it into its platform as, I think, a defensive move. But clearly, the kings of the CDN world understand that a widely deployed well engineered p2p network will have an impact.

I think this is an issue of perception. There's simply no way a large blue chip will be happy with the design philosophy of p2p delivery.

Whether it works or not is almost beside the point here...

I think the only way they would buy into is if you avoid the evil three letters "P2P" ... which is just code for 'lawsuit' to them.

Pull a marketing move and pitch it to them as end-user-content-assist or something.

> I think this is an issue of perception.

Exactly. So all there's needed is to tell them there's a traditional CDN framework in a hot standby, just in case this novel ultra low cost CDN experiences any operational problems.

> There's simply no way a large blue chip will be happy with the design philosophy of p2p delivery.

Maybe they'd start crying about piracy upon hearing the term "p2p" ?

Huge P2P networks for large content distributions will never work, as the internet isn't build for that.

Imaging everyone would be driving directly to the farmer to buy egs or milk. The roads would be crowded. A centralized technology is much more effective. (also in terms of energy saved)

PS. Video sites are probably going to integrate this technology soon...

Actually your point works for P2P not a centralized solution.

A centralized server is 1 rd vs a P2P highway of a undetermined amount of decentralized servers(roads).

I believe that the answer is not a centralized solution or a P2P solution in my opinion. Maybe a hybrid network of well placed server farms that utilize a form of controlled P2P with authorized hosts. This avoids the legal/protection issues, yet extends the power of central solutions.

How is BitTorrent's allegedly poor QoS an engineering issue?

BitTorrent's QoS is a function of reachable peers who have the content you want and their bandwidth. This applies to all P2P networks.

i would say that bitTorrent's are better performing than an overloaded client server transmission.

at least you have a fighting chance, i would say thats pretty good QoS

Reply on news.ycombinator.com