Streaming Server at DVinfo.net

James Rulison · June 19th, 2002, 10:37 AM

Besides codecs, bit rates, and all the other stuff you have to decide on a method of delivery.

1.) Streaming vs. Download

2.) Security (Media rights)

3.) Cost of streaming server (MS free, Quicktime Free, REAL cost)

4.) Cost of OS and hardware

I use to work for a company called Burst.com we did video on Linux streaming Windows and Quicktime codecs. They used an advanced buffering technology. I have not seen anything close the quality we were getting.

Anyone else think I missed anything?

Best,
Big James

Adam Brooks · June 19th, 2002, 12:02 PM

How many concurrent streams do you need ofr a live event?

Is it a live event?

What does the customer want to stream?

Cost of throughput?

Who will serve the media?

How will the content be encoded?

There are a dozen others that I can't think of right now but that's a few more for the pile.
Enjoy,
Adam

James Rulison · July 11th, 2002, 10:44 AM

Good questions I didn't even think of live events. Of course with Live events you really need to know Unicast or Multicast?

Best,
James

Rob Lohman · July 12th, 2002, 04:41 AM

I don't think multicast is workable until we switch over to IPv6
networks.... Personally i prefer downloads because i can usually
get a higher quality that way. And sometimes streaming just
does not seems to work (firewalls tend to step in the way here).

There are only two types of media that are really the most secure.
That is real and microsoft streaming (NOT over HTTP!!!). Quicktime
can be quite secure if also not streamed over HTTP but over there
own channel.

But then again, why do you want someone not to download your
movies. If someone downloads my movie and keeps it that can
only be a good thing (ie, they liked it and are probably gonna
show it to more people).

Adam Brooks · July 12th, 2002, 08:59 AM

The unicast Vs. multicast question is one of money and bandwidth.
You mayybe able to unicast meybe to 10 people by yourself.
If you want to reach 10,000 people you HAVE to multicast.
As unicast implies, it means you are casting from a single source poiint. i.e. your computer.
Multicast uses a network of repeater servers, so that no one server is overburdened by requests for video.
The way true streaming works best is when there are few or no extra hops from the server side to the client side.
If I am trying to reach 5-10 people with a short session where all the viewers are in the same city but view from their homes on broadband, like a community college online course. Then a unicast makes sense. But if that number is 100 or more the multicast model will have to be employed.
Money+Bandwidth=#of viewers that can be reached simutaniously

Adam

James Rulison · July 12th, 2002, 01:51 PM

Yes Adam,

But as you stated requires a network of repeaters. Several network companies including the one I work for do not support Multicast cause they don't want the traffic on their backbone.

However Multicast works very well in approved network.

Best,
James

June 19th, 2002, 10:37 AM	#1
James Rulison Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Chino Hills, CA Posts: 59	Streaming Server Besides codecs, bit rates, and all the other stuff you have to decide on a method of delivery. 1.) Streaming vs. Download 2.) Security (Media rights) 3.) Cost of streaming server (MS free, Quicktime Free, REAL cost) 4.) Cost of OS and hardware I use to work for a company called Burst.com we did video on Linux streaming Windows and Quicktime codecs. They used an advanced buffering technology. I have not seen anything close the quality we were getting. Anyone else think I missed anything? Best, Big James

June 19th, 2002, 12:02 PM	#2
Adam Brooks Number 1000 Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Boston, Ma Posts: 13	How many concurrent streams do you need ofr a live event? Is it a live event? What does the customer want to stream? Cost of throughput? Who will serve the media? How will the content be encoded? There are a dozen others that I can't think of right now but that's a few more for the pile. Enjoy, Adam __________________ Adam Brooks Media Consultant Boston, Ma.

July 12th, 2002, 04:41 AM	#4
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I don't think multicast is workable until we switch over to IPv6 networks.... Personally i prefer downloads because i can usually get a higher quality that way. And sometimes streaming just does not seems to work (firewalls tend to step in the way here). There are only two types of media that are really the most secure. That is real and microsoft streaming (NOT over HTTP!!!). Quicktime can be quite secure if also not streamed over HTTP but over there own channel. But then again, why do you want someone not to download your movies. If someone downloads my movie and keeps it that can only be a good thing (ie, they liked it and are probably gonna show it to more people). __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 12th, 2002, 08:59 AM	#5
Adam Brooks Number 1000 Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Boston, Ma Posts: 13	The unicast Vs. multicast question is one of money and bandwidth. You mayybe able to unicast meybe to 10 people by yourself. If you want to reach 10,000 people you HAVE to multicast. As unicast implies, it means you are casting from a single source poiint. i.e. your computer. Multicast uses a network of repeater servers, so that no one server is overburdened by requests for video. The way true streaming works best is when there are few or no extra hops from the server side to the client side. If I am trying to reach 5-10 people with a short session where all the viewers are in the same city but view from their homes on broadband, like a community college online course. Then a unicast makes sense. But if that number is 100 or more the multicast model will have to be employed. Money+Bandwidth=#of viewers that can be reached simutaniously Adam __________________ Adam Brooks Media Consultant Boston, Ma.

July 11th, 2002, 10:44 AM	#3
James Rulison Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Chino Hills, CA Posts: 59	Good questions I didn't even think of live events. Of course with Live events you really need to know Unicast or Multicast? Best, James

July 12th, 2002, 01:51 PM	#6
James Rulison Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Chino Hills, CA Posts: 59	Yes Adam, But as you stated requires a network of repeaters. Several network companies including the one I work for do not support Multicast cause they don't want the traffic on their backbone. However Multicast works very well in approved network. Best, James