On 28/11/03 10:08 am, "Richard Dobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You seem to have conveniently skirted the issue here of latency which I > think is a major one, and the issue that other already deployed systems > (SIP, Xbox) use the p2p approach for very good reason and perfectly > sucessfully. You also seem to have skirted the issue that the client acting > as the server is also a major point of failure, if they loose connection > then the whole conference will stop and no one will be able to chat, whereas > p2p will just continue on fine for the rest of the people. There are several > ways the client could loose its connection either internet problems (as ADSL > and Cable broadband are not always that reliable over here in the UK), if > the person is on dialup they might have hit their connection time limit and > been disconnected and have to redial (over here in the UK dialup users on > most unmeatered packages have set limits for the length of time each > connection can be, usually 1-2 hours, at which time they will need to > redial), or someone might not like the person hosting the conference (maybe > they were excluded from the chat) and DDOS's them, in light of these it > shows that your server solution has some serious problems that it cant > really solve very easily. If I were initiating a conference (ie I was the server) and I lost my connection d*mn if the rest of the meeting can rattle on without my hearing it. It might be OK for Xbox but in a business environment it is very important to have all members around all the time and especially the Chairman! As to bandwidth, unless I am missing something each peer needs to send out their audio to each member - 7 people means 6*7=42 streams out. With a sever you have 12 streams to the 6 clients - one out and a mixed one back (sans your own data). Even if the output stream is broadcast, with p2p each client will have to mix those 6 streams so it is almost the server anyway! With a server based solution the client only has a single stream in and out to handle and the server is the only one doing the donkey work and technically not much more than a client would do in a p2p environment, which is logical as in p2p each p has to be a server in anything but name. Tim _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
