
Netflix uses FreeBSD 9.0 - auvi
https://signup.netflix.com/openconnect/software
======
vezzy-fnord
Yet you can't actually _use_ Netflix on FreeBSD.

~~~
gwu78
This is where you usually see some silly comment like "Because the majority of
users cannot use a command line and will never use FreeBSD."

Of course that majority will also never be given a choice.

Sony PlayStation users are using FreeBSD. I doubt they will complain.

Imagine, for the purposes of a thought experiment, a majority of users would
be receptive to using FreeBSD. Imagine that instead of staring at a screen
that says "Buffering...", the user could transfer files to the her home
computer with something as simple as:

tnftp -o /home/netflix/nextmovieinqueue.mp4
ftp://netflixftpserverlocatedatisp.netflix.com/requestedmovie.mp4

And when the download completes, the user could serve the video to the devices
that are connected to her WiFi router:

tcpserver -vRHDl0 192.168.2.0 80 bozohttpd -snX /home/netflix

And then she accesses the file as she would any video on the www, by pointing
her web browser/http client at
[http://192.168.2.0/nextmovieinqueue.mp4](http://192.168.2.0/nextmovieinqueue.mp4)

In this imaginary scenario, how could "DRM" be implemented without forcing the
customer to use a particular OS, browser or video player, or some other closed
source program?

Could it be done?

~~~
vezzy-fnord
Except that's just a fantasy scenario and not how Netflix actually works or
would work on FreeBSD.

The problem is there is no port of Silverlight with the necessary DRM. The
latter is unethical in the context of free software.

However, from what I've read, Netflix intend on switching fully to HTML5 in
the near future. This will make their platform OS-agnostic, while still
benefiting from things like Encrypted Media Extensions (EME).

~~~
chongli
How is an open source browser like Firefox supposed to implement _Encrypted
Media Extensions_ without leaking the keys to anyone who decides to grab the
source code?

~~~
mcpherrinm
In the same way Firefox implements Silverlight today: It's still a binary
plugin that talks to the OS for some "secure path", but it's only the
decryption in the closed path, instead of the entire playback experience. I
don't think HTML5/EME will get Linux/BSD et al users watching Netflix any more
than they were before.

Though breaking EME is probably more interesting for a certain class of
developer than implementing all of Silverlight with DRM is.

------
alberth
From June 2012, more information at:
[http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-
stable/2012-June/...](http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-
stable/2012-June/068129.html)

------
ultimoo
And on the other end of the spectrum, they require you have Microsoft
Silverlight available to your browser.

~~~
hrkristian
Thankfully, there are easily installable Wine ports so it isn't really a
problem.

Netflix does not seem interested in enforcing their "Linux (/*BSD) ban"[1], I
can even use a desktop recorder to rip straight from Netflix if I wanted which
essentially makes it a "take what you want" service.

[1] [http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/02/netflix-no-plans-to-
suppo...](http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/02/netflix-no-plans-to-support-
linux)

------
kbar13
When are people gonna shake the false impression that *BSD are outdated and
their flavor of Debuntu is far superior?

~~~
Slackwise
When people also acknowledge that Gentoo is effectively the best of both
worlds?

~~~
hypnotist
Actually, Arch[1] is the best of both worlds.

1.[https://www.archlinux.org](https://www.archlinux.org)

Comparison to others:
[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Compared_to_Other_...](https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Compared_to_Other_Distributions)

~~~
Slackwise
Arch is closer to Fedora than Gentoo or BSD.

Gentoo still uses a BSD Ports-like system called Portage. You can still have a
sync'd directory of Ebuilds, which correspond to FreeBSD Makefiles, only you
have the added benefit of USE flags, compilation options, and even binary
packages.

You can run Portage on FreeBSD.

Gentoo still uses, by default, OpenRC, which is a BSD-like init system that
also handles dependencies. It is compatible with other FreeBSD and NetBSD
scripts as well.

You can run OpenRC on FreeBSD and NetBSD.

Arch, on the other hand, has Fedora's systemd, which is completely
incompatible with any of the BSD's thanks to its use of cgroups, which are a
Linux kernel only feature, and the developers of systemd have dismissed,
openly, the BSDs as outdated and unimportant.

Arch also uses binary packages for most of its packages, which is closer to
rpm/dpkg than it is to Portage/ports.

The AUR is a limited system designed for pulling in alternative and source
packages. It lacks USE flags and compile-time and runtime end user control.
The AUR is mostly managed by the community, and many AUR packages have a lower
quality than the base pacman available packages. The less popular a particular
AUR package, the less people will be involved in it, and the lower quality it
will be.

On the flipside, the BSDs have impeccable quality packages. They're not
configurable without tweaking stuff manually, but the defaults are rock solid.

Gentoo's core Portage tree packages are managed by official developers who are
assigned duties. And like the AUR, the community is able to apply any number
of "overlays" on top of the Portage tree, giving the community direct ease of
modification of not only community packages, but core ones as well.

So, how is Arch the "best of BSD and Linux" when it has absolutely nothing to
do with BSD?

~~~
rakoo
> So, how is Arch the "best of BSD and Linux" when it has absolutely nothing
> to do with BSD?

You're being a little biased here.

Systemd has been default since 2012, yet Archlinux started in 2002. Before
systemd, the default system (initscripts[0]) was very much BSD-like by design.
Not anymore, that's true.

Regarding packages, you don't _have_ to use binary packages; you can very well
use the ABS [1], which AFAIK really is what ports are about:

\- You get a tree where you can download recipes. They're called PKGBUILD in
Arch, ebuild in Gentoo, but essentially do the same thing. Take a look at
nginx's PKGBUILD [2], and you will recognize a logic similar to the
corresponding ebuild [3], yet far simpler (because less configurable, I hear
you coming)

\- You have a set of tools to create a fake root, calculate dependencies,
build the package according to global properties (there are compile flags [4],
but I have no idea how they compares to the famous USE flags) and install the
package.

\- Pre-built packages are just packages that were built by the Archlinux team
with sensible defaults and have proven to be stable enough (by Arch's
standards), so I as a user don't have to bother re-compiling. But the process
behind is completely done with PKGBUILDs.

The AUR is "just" a staging zone where packages get to be tested by the
community at large. When it's popular enough and a Trusted User commits to
maintaining the package, the PKGBUILD can be part of the [extra] repository,
where all packages are automatically built and proposed to arch users... but
still, with the same build process.

To me, Arch sits between Gentoo/*BSD and "higher-level" distros: it keeps the
process as close as possible to upstream applications by providing a minimal
framework to install and update them, so that users can get understand how
gluing packages together works, and what they have to do to have a functional
system that does what they want, and not spend time on understanding how the
packages work inside. Arch is more about understanding and using the system as
a whole, than understanding every brick.

[0]
[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Initscripts](https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Initscripts)
[1]
[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ABS#What_is_the_Arch_Bu...](https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ABS#What_is_the_Arch_Build_System.3F)
[2]
[https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/t...](https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/nginx)
[3] [http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-
bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-...](http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-
bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-
servers/nginx/nginx-1.4.4.ebuild?revision=1.1&view=markup) [4]
[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Makepkg#Architecture.2C...](https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Makepkg#Architecture.2C_compile_flags)

------
silverwizard
Ummm, it's a DRM, not technical issue. The DRM is imposed upon them by content
creators. In theory, FreeBSD could get a moonlight port, then try to license
the keys used for the DRM, but unfortunately, this is likely a deal breaker
for Netflix. Also the FreeBSD project has to do the work, Netflix can't, since
they can negotiate a contract on behalf of FreeBSD.

~~~
ams6110
Moonlight is open source. Netflix could port the DRM if they wanted to;
FreeBSD would not need to do it. by my read of the CC license they'd have to
contribute that back to the project, but I'd guess they could then negotiate
the licensing of the keys; keys are not code so I don't see any more problem
with that than using your own keys in e.g. GnuPG.

So few people use *BSD as a desktop that the demand for it is not going to
make it happen, however.

~~~
elq
> Netflix could port the DRM if they wanted to

I'm pretty sure the DRM used in the Netflix silverlight player is Microsoft's
"PlayReady", so no... Netflix can't port it if they want.

------
kev009
At vBSDCon Scott Long announced they'd been tracking -CURRENT for over a
month, so assume they're already on 10-STABLE in a lot of places.

Some good details on the OCA [http://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-
BSDCan-20130515.pd...](http://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-
BSDCan-20130515.pdf)

------
kraemate
I'm confused, doesn't Netflix use AWS for all their servers? AFAIK you can't
run FreeBSD on EC2 without significant challenges.

~~~
misframer
There are a few AMIs available: [http://www.daemonology.net/freebsd-on-
ec2/](http://www.daemonology.net/freebsd-on-ec2/)

------
atmosx
The first time I've scrolled through the title I've read: _Netflix uses
NetBSD_ and I thought _that 's strange_. When I had to re-read the title and
realized it was using _FreeBSD_ I wasn't that surprised.

FreeBSD is a natural choice if you want stability, even over Linux. I enjoy
their update scheme although the lack of an official 'pkg' repository gives in
to my nerves.

So, why is this news, is beyond me...

ps. I see a lot of people complaining that they use an open platform (FreeBSD
in this case) to create a _closed product_. If I'm not mistaken (I'm not a US
citizen and Netflix doesn't work in my country) it's a media-content rental
service. So what exactly is the open source alternative,
www.PirateFlixbay.org? :-)

~~~
gwu78
"... and I thought that's strange."

Why? I believe the leader of their core group works for Netflix.

~~~
atmosx
Because is the unpopular choice. I almost never came across someone using
NetBSD, except myself 10 years ago.

------
javindo
[s]I may have misinterpreted this, but to me it seems as though all this
provides is two things: 1) Netflix get some technology for free from which
they can profit and 2) Netflix get to boast about using free/open software.

I think instead of a page thanking FreeBSD for software, Netflix, alongside
many other large companies who use free software, could make more of an effort
to actually contribute to the software proportionally to their use of it.[/s]

I apologise, clearly I had misinterpreted it and was wrong!

~~~
swills
Netflix does contribute quite a bit:

[https://www.freebsdfoundation.org/donate/sponsors](https://www.freebsdfoundation.org/donate/sponsors)

Or search for "Sponsored by: Netflix" in the commit messages.

~~~
zhemao
I thought it funny that NetBSD is a donor to the FreeBSD foundation.

~~~
samplonius
It is pragmatic. NetBSD will grab keys bits from FreeBSD, and will want to
periodically merge changes. If they don't commit their changes "upstream"...
but really more "sidestream", they will have to re-merge their local changes
each time too.

------
greenlakejake
> GNU has a concept of freedom that it tries to protect via the GPL. Licenses
> like the BSD or MIT do not.

BSD and MIT are trying to protect their own concept of freedom.

------
Twirrim
That's interesting. Only about a year and a half ago when there was the leap
second fun that disrupted so many people they were running on CentOS 5 (and so
weren't affected):
[https://twitter.com/adrianco/status/219238574552387586](https://twitter.com/adrianco/status/219238574552387586)

~~~
justincormack
The Centos part is the control layer that runs on AWS that people talk about
mostly. The BSD part is the actual video streaming.

------
justincormack
There was a good talk about this at EuroBSDcon but the video does not seem to
be available or the slides. Running the Netflix Video CDN on FreeBSD and
Handling 30% of all US Internet Traffic by Alistair Crooks.

------
toddan
I am curious on what kind of software they are running with nginx on freeBSD
or is all the video content just raw video files that their client software
directs to?

------
gprasanth
And they were sponsors at EuroBSD conference this year too.

------
waps
Juniper routers, the most used routing equipment after cisco, runs on FreeBSD.
So everything on the internet effectively uses FreeBSD.

The same goes for VxWorks, and IOS (the cisco one).

~~~
happywolf
The company that owns VxWorks, Wind River System, did involve in BSD circa
2000, and the most can be said is early VxWorks did share some lineage with
BSD Unix, but ever since VxWorks has been switched to WIND kernel, I doubt we
can really put these two OSes in the same group.

~~~
pstuart
Now owned by Intel.

