Why can't a wireless router buffer several minutes of a video?

[tmart00]

Searching the web has been frustrating since "wireless router buffering" almost exclusively leads to complaints about buffering on the front end. But why can't streaming videos be stored on the router? I would think the code to store (say) up to 15 minutes of video would not be difficult. In the past the storage space might have been a cost issue, but not now.

With several minutes of a show safely buffered in memory, I would think buffering on the PC would become a thing of the past. Since there's nothing on the web I can find about this, apparently there's a trivial problem that I just can't see. If so, sorry, but could someone tell me what it is? I know providers wouldn't be thrilled at the idea of potentially having to transfer additional data, but how could they stop it?

 

[ColinTaylor]

Because that's not how routers work. A router moves packets of data from one interface to another. It should do this as quickly as possible. It doesn't differentiate one TCP/UDP packet from another.

What you are describing is a proxy server. Proxy servers have lots of disk space and RAM to cache information so it can be reused if needed. But that doesn't speed up the initial download. Unfortunately nowadays most web traffic is encrypted or dynamically generated meaning that proxy servers are mostly ineffective.

 

[tmart00]

Thanks. I know it would be a real bastardization of the router's basic function but couldn't they implement a sort of proxy server directly on it? The new software would sit between the normal router functions and the outside world. It would have no way of understanding "pause" or "resume" or similar, but I imagine that can be provided by a browser plug-in.

Never mind, this is getting a little too convoluted for me. Thanks for the help!

 

[RMerlin]

Buffering is the responsibility of the software downloading and playing the video.

 

[tmart00]

Sure, but why hasn't anyone used large buffers yet to stop all the delays? My guess is that it's too inefficient if you want to keep a lot of data. Wouldn't it be better to store it on the router?

 

[RMerlin]

Sure, but why hasn't anyone used large buffers yet to stop all the delays? My guess is that it's too inefficient if you want to keep a lot of data. Wouldn't it be better to store it on the router?

That's not the router's job. The router has no idea what type of data its transferring, all it sees are packets of binary data going from one IP to another. And buffering at a router level is actually an undesirable thing, as it introduces latency in services that might be latency-sensitive, like VoIP or gaming.

 

[tmart00]

I've read about bufferbloat but does that really apply here? I'm talking about implementing a sort of application layer on the router. I imagine it would involve a separate processor so initially it would be pretty expensive but imagine how much people would pay for streaming video with no delays.

 

[RMerlin]

I stand by my first response. This is not a router's job. The player already does buffering, it's its job to increase that buffer size if it's not sufficient.

 

[tmart00]

It does seem far better to do buffering on the destination device but since no one has done this effectively yet I assume there's a need for a fresh look at things.

Most likely people don't suffer from the buffering problems we see here in the Bay Area. Thanks again for the input.

 

[System Error Message]

regardless whether or not it is a router's job, you cannot buffer downloads as that remains at the server, you can only buffer uploads which if you are buffering means your connection either sucks or you need QoS to make sure that other things dont disturb the stream.

If the video is local either the server isnt powerful enough or you need better wifi to handle the bandwidth (like wireless AC on router and client).

 

[tmart00]

I was only thinking about eliminating all the delays I have with streaming video. Are you saying it's technically impossible to buffer it?

I've read all the explanations until I'm bleary-eyed. My Comcast performance (typically using HBO GO) varies considerably even at unexpected times despite my router only having to handle my PC in a fixed location. I've read the Bay Area is infamous for not having enough infrastructure to handle its internet load, so maybe this is largely a non-issue for others.

 

[MichaelCG]

Also keep in mind, your router doesn't have nearly enough memory to actually buffer anything useful. It is up to the consuming application to provide the buffering. A decision is made somewhere on how much to buffer. If you want a large buffer, you need memory as well as a delay before playback to populate the buffer. Most people get annoyed by any delays.

Remember the dial-up days when using RealPlayer. The buffer was configurable. The more you buffered, the less drop outs, but the longer it took before the stream actually played.

 

[tmart00]

Sure, that's why I was thinking we'd need extra hardware to handle things. But I think the real answer is to have an adequate infrastructure rather than what we have where I live.

 

[TonyH]

I was only thinking about eliminating all the delays I have with streaming video. Are you saying it's technically impossible to buffer it?

I've read all the explanations until I'm bleary-eyed. My Comcast performance (typically using HBO GO) varies considerably even at unexpected times despite my router only having to handle my PC in a fixed location. I've read the Bay Area is infamous for not having enough infrastructure to handle its internet load, so maybe this is largely a non-issue for others.

My wife is soap opera addicts. Every night she watches her favored stuffs from our old country real time streaming on our home theater using wireless connection via -AC mode. Router is NG R7800, I never used QOS in any router. Download speed from ISP is 50MBPS steady all the time. She never complains about stuttering video or such. It is just like playing Blue ray disc.

 

[System Error Message]

comcast, an american cable ISP, they are known to cap performance of certain sites and applications at certain times of the day. If your bandwidth is bigger than 20Mb/s and your video buffers (40Mb/s for 4k) than its really a cap if performance varies and it is not because of a crappy router.