What 50 GB of RMS total bandwidth will get you

If you are using Dolphin to start a website, chances are, one of the things that impressed you was the Ray video chat.  I like it too.  If it weren't for Ray video chat, I would not be using this script.

 

You have probably already figured out that the free Boonex RMS (rms.boonex.com), just doesn't work.  With so many people trying to use rms.boonex.com at the same time, it's no surprise why it doesn't work. 

 

The solutions are to either set up your own RMS server, which you cannot do on a shared server.  RMS needs a dedicated server.  If you need a dedicated server, plan on spending about $160 minimum.  The second solution, is to purchase third party RMS hosting.  You can purchase RMS hosting starting at $5 per month and that will get you 50 GB of total bandwidth, which I assume has the same meaning as 50GB of data transfer.  50GB bandwidth might sound impressive at first, and for standard web sites it is, but for anything involving streaming media, it really isn't much.  Of course, for $5 a month, you shouldn't expect much.  Just don't have overly high expectations for what you can do with a mere 50GB of transfer in streaming media applications.

 

I've done a few basic calculations, so anybody that decides to use third party RMS, will have a better idea of what they can actually expect for their money in a real world application.

 

1. FLV streaming media with a resolution of 640 x 480, 24FPS, Medium audio quality @ 22,050 Hz ---- will need a streaming data rate of approximately 1063000 Bps (Bits Per Second)

 

2. Each connection that either delivers or receives video in the above format will add to the total Bps used.

 

3. At a data rate of 1063000 Bps, a single connection will need 478 megabytes per hour of transfer.

 

4. At a data rate of 478 megabytes per hour, your 50 gigabytes of total bandwidth will be used up in approximately 105 hours.  If you distribute that 105 hours over a 30 day period, a single connection that were connected for 210 minutes each day would use up the 50GB bandwidth.

 

5. Since a single connection is useless (It would mean somebody is transmitting video, but no one's watching), let's look at the resources used by multiple connections.  For this analysis to make any sense, you need people transmitting, and people watching.  Using the streaming video specification defined in item 1 above, if one person were transmitting, and one was listening, they could do that for 105 minutes each day.  This is a total time for the 24 hour period.  For 50GB of bandwidth, let's just say that you'll have a total of 210 Connection/minutes per day total, to be distributed between all the users active in video chat.  If every day, you have 5 people that transmit a web cam signal, and 5 others that watch that web cam signal, that's a total of 10 connections and they will each have 21 minutes of video chat time to use.  please note that a user that is both transmitting a signal, and also watching a signal, counts for 2 connections... an upstream connection, and a downstream connection.  In other words, if 2 people were using video IM, that would be 4 connections.... each IM user would be using an upstream connection and a downstream connection.

 

If you had 3 pairs of people using video chat, each pair would have 17.5 minutes per day of video chat available.  Anything longer than that.... and you need more RMS bandwidth.  Of course, this entire analysis, uses an FLV format of 640 x 480 @ 24 FPS which is pretty good video setting for a web cam. 

 

If your users are all connected with a web cams that transmits video @ 320 x 240, 12 FPS, with medium quality audio, that will use a lot less bandwidth..... 141,000 Bps per connection, to be exact.  With the lower quality of video, which is about as low quality as web cams get, you can expect about 7.5 times more video chatting time before you use up your 50GB bandwidth.  This analysis uses very specific examples to perform the calculations and is not meant to be any type of definitive guide.  The bottom line is, with 50GB of RMS bandwidth, you can expect between 3 to 21 hours of video chatting time per day to be shared by your entire user base.  The total chatting time available to your users will depend largely on the resolution of transmitted video.  So... that 50GB of RMS bandwidth that you purchased for $5 won't go very far, but you shouldn't expect it to for that price.  It is certainly worth the small, $5 price, just don't complain to your RMS hosting provider, when you discover that 50GB of bandwidth won't handle a moderately busy video chat room.  If you have a rapidly growing community, and video chat it catching on, be ready to make the jump to a dedicated server with RMS and the $160/month bill that comes with it.  You won't need to do any complex analysis as to when it is time to make the move.... your users will let you know.

My opinions expressed on this site, in no way represent those of Boonex or Boonex employees.
Quote · 9 Feb 2009

 

good post but you forget one thing. incoming (streaming to the server) bandwidth is not counted toward bandwidth usage, only outgoing bandwidth is charged by hosting providers, you and your ISP are paying for your bandwidth to send to the server, so a host does not charge for that and nor can they.

Sorry, but that is not correct.  Bandwidth is bandwidth and many hosting companies add incoming and outgoing bandwidth, which is the true total bandwidth.  Me and my ISP do not pay for data sent to the server, we pay for the privilege of sending data to the server.  The guy that owns the server, then charges me for the honor of receiving that data.  If what you said was true regarding hosting companies not charging for incoming data, that could create some horrific problems.  If that were true, then I could connect 1000 web cams of vga quality video to your rms server through my site and not be charged a dime for BW.... I'd only get charged when someone started watching one of those 1000 webcams.  Hmmmm gives me an idea, if you really don't charge your customers for incoming data.  I might start a security company and stream countless thousands of webcams to your RMS.  As long as I polled the cameras one by one, I'd only get charged for a single camera connection!  Please send me signup info!

 

I did check, and there are indeed some hosting companies that only charge for one way traffic, but they charge for the higher of the two, ie, incoming and outgoing.  For the purposes of the original post, we'll just call it correct in the case, and only in the case, where the server hosting company charges for both incoming and outgoing data.  In cases where only one way traffic counts toward bandwidth usage, my numbers will be off, but then the analysis gets too complex for the real purpose of this post, and that was to not expect miracles for $5 a month.

 

On an entirely different note, if you are being charged $100 for an extra TB of BW, you might consider using a data center that does not meter bandwidth.

 

I'm curious.... do you use servers with a 100Mbps connection speed, or a 1000Mbps connection speed?  ..... because if you're using servers with 100Mbps connection and get charged $100 for a GB of extra BW, you need to move to a different data center.

 

 

 

My opinions expressed on this site, in no way represent those of Boonex or Boonex employees.
Quote · 9 Feb 2009

 

 

good post but you forget one thing. incoming (streaming to the server) bandwidth is not counted toward bandwidth usage, only outgoing bandwidth is charged by hosting providers, you and your ISP are paying for your bandwidth to send to the server, so a host does not charge for that and nor can they.

Sorry, but that is not correct.  Bandwidth is bandwidth and many hosting companies add incoming and outgoing bandwidth, which is the true total bandwidth.  Me and my ISP do not pay for data sent to the server, we pay for the privilege of sending data to the server.  The guy that owns the server, then charges me for the honor of receiving that data.  If what you said was true regarding hosting companies not charging for incoming data, that could create some horrific problems.  If that were true, then I could connect 1000 web cams of vga quality video to your rms server through my site and not be charged a dime for BW.... I'd only get charged when someone started watching one of those 1000 webcams.  Hmmmm gives me an idea, if you really don't charge your customers for incoming data.  I might start a security company and stream countless thousands of webcams to your RMS.  As long as I polled the cameras one by one, I'd only get charged for a single camera connection!  Please send me signup info!

 

I did check, and there are indeed some hosting companies that only charge for one way traffic, but they charge for the higher of the two, ie, incoming and outgoing.  For the purposes of the original post, we'll just call it correct in the case, and only in the case, where the server hosting company charges for both incoming and outgoing data.  In cases where only one way traffic counts toward bandwidth usage, my numbers will be off, but then the analysis gets too complex for the real purpose of this post, and that was to not expect miracles for $5 a month.

 

On an entirely different note, if you are being charged $100 for an extra TB of BW, you might consider using a data center that does not meter bandwidth.

 

I'm curious.... do you use servers with a 100Mbps connection speed, or a 1000Mbps connection speed?  ..... because if you're using servers with 100Mbps connection and get charged $100 for a GB of extra BW, you need to move to a different data center.

 

 

 

 Great thread, for awhile there was some discussion at meetings were I work for offering this as a service. However, looks like its well covered. And adding another pipe to satisfy the need (assuming we even got anyone to sign up) would cost more the the added revenue. If we had to do it and spool up some boxes, we felt that $5-$10 per month was the price point. But its the added pipe costs that put us off as the ROI wasn't there.

 

Thanks for the reality check.

~johnny

Quote · 20 Feb 2009

Thank you, houstonlively, for his excellent answer to my question found here:

http://www.boonex.com/unity/forums/#topic/Videos-2009-03-13.htm

 

I am curious. How much of the video stuff (like video comments, video chat, blog videos, etc) can be accomplished by third party services for free (or almost free). Then, can any of these be integrated into the user's experience at a Dolphin-based site?

 

For example, one of my favorite sites, TechCrunch.com, uses http://seesmic.com/ to run its video comments. If you visit any topic story in TechCrunch you can see the video comments on the right sidebar closer to the bottom of the page. These comments are neatly integrated into the page.

 

I do not know of any free video chat services.

 

For the blog videos, I imagine anyone could use YouTube.com. Question is, does Dolphin integrate youtube videos into the user's experience.

 

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Quote · 16 Mar 2009

Thanks for putting that info together Houston!

Quote · 16 Mar 2009

Good info here Houston, Sammie et al, is there a list of RMS service providers around here somewhere?

Quote · 17 Mar 2009

Removed Post

:-)
Quote · 27 Mar 2009

Jimmy, other people might not mind you posting advertising in forum posts but I do.  Please edit your post and remove the advertisement.  There is a place on this site to place ads, but the forums isn't that place.

My opinions expressed on this site, in no way represent those of Boonex or Boonex employees.
Quote · 27 Mar 2009

 Hi,

 

I apologize.  I posted my services due to CALTRADE's post.  I will remove it.

Good info here Houston, Sammie et al, is there a list of RMS service providers around here somewhere?

 Thanks,

 

Jimmy

:-)
Quote · 27 Mar 2009

Jimmy, I didn't mean to come across like a jerk that owns the place, but probably did anyways.  It's not really my job to keep the forums in order, it's the moderators.  Your post wasn't all that bad, it was just me being in a bad mood and I'm the one that should be apologizing There are far worse out-of place posts in various places on the site, and those are the ones that really drive me nuts.  Let's just chalk this one up to me having PMS or something, and I'll try to use a little better judgement next time.  Sorry I got on your case for so little.

My opinions expressed on this site, in no way represent those of Boonex or Boonex employees.
Quote · 27 Mar 2009

Houston - thanks for clarifying this - and for the original analysis.   Jimmy - could you repost your link?  I for one don't mind when people promote services here.  They do open themselve to critiques so it displays some confidence in their offerings.  I still would like to see a list of RMS providers.  If what Sammie is saying about few of them having metering software then you could grab one of those 5 buck a month deals even if you used a ton of bandwidth - of course, it is also possible that such a company won't be around for long so you could be left high and dry.

-

Rob

Quote · 27 Mar 2009

Rob, I took some Midol and feel much better now.

.

A spec that I don't see any RMS hosts providing, is the connection speed of their server to the internet that is providing the RMS hosting.  If you're providing RMS on a dedicated server with a 100Mbit/second connection speed, it's not going to take much to saturate the connection if you're providing hosting for 20 or more sites on the same server and those site are moderately active.  All I can figure, is that video chat isn't immensely popular and RMS providers can get away with hosting a bunch of accounts on the same server.  As long as an RMS provider can get away with it, I suppose it's ok, but it's akin to airlines overbooking flights...... sooner or later, everyone is going to show up at once and create a bottleneck.


.

Realistically, a 100Mbit server can handle a maximum of 80 concurrent connections of VGA quality streaming video, and a little over 500 concurrent connections at the lowest video quality ( 320 x 240 @ 12FPS).  When RMS supports H.264 encoding, thos numbers should improve dramatically.

My opinions expressed on this site, in no way represent those of Boonex or Boonex employees.
Quote · 27 Mar 2009

Hi guys,

Everything is cool.  Let's just pretend this little ordeal never happened and move on. Smile

.

I won't post my RMS Services here without houstonlively's permission as he did spend some time with this thread and I do recongnize it as his property wither it be on a public forum or not.

.

You are correct houstonlively for this:

.

All I can figure, is that video chat isn't immensely popular and RMS providers can get away with hosting a bunch of accounts on the same server.  As long as an RMS provider can get away with it, I suppose it's ok, but it's akin to airlines overbooking flights...... sooner or later, everyone is going to show up at once and create a bottleneck.

.

I don't want to call it overbooking when I connect several sites to my RMS Connection as I constantly monitor my resources every day.  If I see a growing trend in usage to the point where it will slow another person's RMS Connection down, I would do what I can to figure out which site it is (look for lots of user activity on a site) and will move that person's RMS Connection to a different server.  I also have a test site where I will pull up RMS dependent widgets to see how well they load for me and work.  Then I can hope for the same loading time and reliability for my other clients.

.

Also, I always tell my clients if they have any issues at all with their RMS dependent widgets to please contact me as soon as possible so I can get the issue straightened out.  I rely on my own resource monitors, client input, and test site to make sure everybody has a good RMS Connection that is connecting to one of my particular servers.  Just a little insight to how I run my RMS Connection services. Wink

.

Talk to ya'll soon!

Jimmy

:-)
Quote · 27 Mar 2009
 
 
Below is the legacy version of the Boonex site, maintained for Dolphin.Pro 7.x support.
The new Dolphin solution is powered by UNA Community Management System.