Skip Navigation


Peer to peer a way to deliver TV across Europe?
Monday 03 September 2007 12:01:49 by Andrew Ferguson

The European broadcasting body is looking into a file sharing system called Tribler for distributing HDTV content. Tribler is different to other systems such as those used by BBC iPlayer and 4oD in that it runs on a credit system. Credits are earned by sharing material with others, thus encouraging more people to leave devices on to share material. More on this story over at BBC News Online.

Interestingly the PlayStation 3 has been made to run Tribler turning the gaming console into a video-sharing device. Enabling TV downloads on a wide range of devices is key to ensuring widespread adoption of the services.

While peer to peer techniques make the service delivery cheap for the content provider, it is not really saving money in general. The cost is moved to someone else which is either the broadband provider, if they run an unlimited service, or the consumer. One other hidden cost is the electricity for keeping a device on long enough to download content, which if downloading from other broadband users, can take a long time.

Comments

Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
Ah well another brilliant and simple service which will fail in this country and cause nothing but frustration for users due to the same old throttling and so the oh so hilariously named traffic management many ISPs along with BT in the UK impose. As for "which if downloading from other broadband users, can take a long time" ya joking right?? most hardcore file sharers use servers and as this service is european based the download rate even if you just connect to a single swedish or frence user will max alot of connections here in the uk lol
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 9 years ago
Countries generally only have a finite amount of capacity interconnecting to the other European internet exchanges, so if lots of people around Europe are chasing content then country interconnects will soon get swamped.

P2P and traffic management is not just the sole preserve of UK providers, very often it is easier to see though due to things like language barriers.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
Well ive never had any issues with the very limited amount of P2P i do with my recent LLU connection, had plenty of issues with my previous ISP though.
I also personally couldnt name another country European or not that has a single entity that controls a good 90% of a countys internet connections which also throttles people. But i bow to your superior knowledge on that, if you say its true i wont doubt you.
Posted by adriandaz over 9 years ago
Andrew, are you reffering to the total interconnect capacity between countries, such as telcos, level3, cogent, abovenet etc... or just the capacity which the telcos have?
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
"has a single entity that controls a good 90% of a countys internet connections which also throttles people" eh ?
Posted by adriandaz over 9 years ago
BT :)
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
BT don't provide 90% of the UK internet connections, cable alone puts it below that and then there's >1m LLU lines. BT Wholesale don't throttle P2P either.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
[q]BT Wholesale don't throttle P2P either[/q]

LMFAO who said anything about wholesale, im talking about the tripe an average home consumer is made to suffer with either through BT residential or one off the many ISPs that are at the financial mercy and begging of BT.
BT do ultimately control most connections in this country BT thereself have over 4,000,000 (Thats NOT including ISPs that use BT infrastructure) Virgin have (and this includes cable as well as services provided over BT infrastructure) 3,467,100 customers.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
My 90% figure may be inaccurate fact of the matter is it doesnt matter as LLU services dont throttle or cap, so they could use this new service just fine. Unlike those that have ties to BT, oh and finally i said "entity that controls" thats different to what you misquoted me as saying which was provide.
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
BT do not "control" the connections, many ISPs have no throttling. Equally some LLU and cable does have throttling, but your only interest is in a polarised rant so what do the facts matter. There will be more cable + LLU customers than BT retail so what are you actually trying to say?
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
OFCOM Q1 2007 BT Retail 25%, Cable modem 23%, LLU/other technology 14%, other DSL 38%.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"many ISPs have no throttling"
True, too bad if they are max based they have a fixed cap instead then
quote"Equally some LLU and cable does have throttling"
Really name a LLU service thats P2P throttled, thats news to me.
quote"There will be more cable + LLU customers than BT retail"
again mis-quoting me, i said BT infrastructure
how many BT retail have is only a small slice of the pie
quote"other DSL 38%"
hmmm i wonder who controls the other DSL 38% figure? (actually i dont wonder i know)
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
LLU that throttles or meters / uses FUPs - Tiscali, Pipex, Plusnet, Eclipse, Orange, Talk Talk, AOL etc.
ISPs making a fuss about P2P TV services - Tiscali - LLU operator.

Virgin cable throttles http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/internet/traffic.html

Some ISPs without throttling don't meter off-peak, or don't meter upstream at all. A 60 GB peak allowance with 300 GB off-peak via IPStream is perfectly workable for a P2P TV service, etc etc. You're just plain wrong that only LLU can carry this type of service.

What is the "control" crap you keep spouting anyway.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"LLU that throttles or meters / uses FUPs - Tiscali, Pipex, Plusnet, Eclipse, Orange, Talk Talk, AOL etc"
Ill give you that one, though why anyone would choose any of those, even though alot also provide non LLU is a mystery.
quote"Virgin cable throttles..."
Indeed they do i never denied that infact i mentioned it in the latest virgin story.
quote"Some ISPs without throttling don't meter off-peak,"
Yea which is often un-godly hours and in terms of a 24 hour period most of it they often class as peak.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"What is the "control" crap you keep spouting anyway."
ISPs that provide the majority of services provide a MAX based product. The rental charge or purchase of a Central goes to BT. BT in one way or another control the majority of Internet connectivity in this country. Surely even you must admit if they went out of business tomorrow more than half the country wouldnt have the internet.
Posted by c_j_ over 9 years ago
"Many ISPs have no throttling"

Then they're not unlimited, or not affordable.

Any affordable ISP allowing 60GB peak/300GB off peak knows that if any substantial part of their userbase actually used that much, none of them would get a decent service, let alone get the allowances they think they've paid for.

Today's state of the UK BTw-based ISP market was predictable once BTw were allowed to force CBC pricing onto the market. And after BTw play the same Ofcom game with 21CN geographic pricing, LLU exchange cherry-picking will leave punters outside LLU areas looking pretty sick.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"Today's state of the UK BTw-based ISP market was predictable once BTw were allowed to force CBC pricing onto the market. And after BTw play the same Ofcom game with 21CN geographic pricing, LLU exchange cherry-picking will leave punters outside LLU areas looking pretty sick."

Very well put and far better than i managed to put it.
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
" BT in one way or another control the majority of Internet connectivity" - BT *provide* most of the connectivity, for sure. "Control" is debatable - they don't throttle P2P or charge per GB. With a regulated price structure and retailers able to run services in different ways it is debatable how much "control" there is.

Throttling, caps, GB allowances, FUPs are all means to match supply and demand and are certainly not unique to BT infrastructure - witness Virgin cable - or to the UK.
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
"once BTw were allowed to force CBC pricing onto the market." standard pricing continues to be available, but nobody wanted the £40/month wholesale 2M link let alone a Max equivalent.

"Then they're not unlimited" - nobody said they were, the issue was whether they were throttled and therefore a problem for P2P apps. Nothing is unlimited when the resources are finite, too many heavy users will break an LLU or Cable service just like a BTw one.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
So herdwick if BT are not the enemy when 21CN comes along which they keep saying will be cheaper to provide, we can all expect to have cheaper services that are not throttled or capped can we???
Im looking forward to how you answer that and linking back to this when 21CN becomes widespread.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"too many heavy users will break an LLU or Cable service just like a BTw one."

That is absolute rubbish, nobodys broke the bethere service, my ukonline upto 22Mb has run as fast as the day i subscribed and the only reason virgin have throttles and caps in place now is nothing to do with user greed but all to do with their greed and having to pay hollywood celebs for their rather naff adverts. The only people that broke the virgin service were virgin thereself by loosing sky channels, imposing caps, charging premium rate for support and soooo much more.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 9 years ago
Herdwick, utter rubbish. I was happy with a £40 2MBit connection I could do things like enjoy low-latency games and VoIP on (as opposed to a "less expensive" "4MBit" connection which never goes about 1MBit and has high latency and 7% packet loss).
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.