delay aware push pull protocols for live video streaming in p2p systems n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 118 Views
  • Uploaded on

http://napa-wine.eu. Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems. Alessandro Russo, Renato Lo Cigno DISI – University of Trento, Italy locigno @ disi.unitn.it http://disi.unitn.it/locigno. P2P Multimedia Streaming.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems' - abraham-nichols


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
delay aware push pull protocols for live video streaming in p2p systems

http://napa-wine.eu

Delay-Aware Push/Pull Protocols for Live Video Streaming in P2P Systems

Alessandro Russo, Renato Lo Cigno

DISI – University of Trento, Italy

locigno @ disi.unitn.it

http://disi.unitn.it/locigno

p2p multimedia streaming
P2P Multimedia Streaming
  • P2P is cool, but why streaming? And why live, real-time streaming
    • Think of out-of-country TV broadcasting
      • easier to get Internet connection than a satellite dish
    • Think of the cost of starting a new TV channel
      • traditional TV broadcasting vs. client-server vs. P2P
  • P2P-TV could become one of the dominant multimedia applications on the Internet
    • Some systems already deployed: PPLive, TVAnts, CoolStreaming, … with hundreds of channels already available

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

p2p multimedia streaming contd
P2P Multimedia Streaming contd.
  • P2P-TV is resource-hungry
    • previously unseen traffic volumes to/from the users
      • 1+ mbit/s sustained download
      • Even higher upload (if available)
  • P2P-TV is challenging to design
    • large peer count with heterogeneous networking resources
      • This is not VoD, potentially millions of users watching the same live channel
    • tight delay constraints
      • This is not file sharing, delay is the design objective

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

outline of talk
Outline of Talk
  • P2P streaming systems, definitions
  • Protocols for Chunk Trading
  • Push & Pull, why both?
  • Delay Aware Peer Selection
  • Wrap-Up and Future Work

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

p2p streaming systems
P2P Streaming Systems
  • As in the previous talk ... yes, we do talk to each other before presentations 
    • 1 source generates media chunks at Bs Mbit/s
    • Peers receive and transmit chunks
  • The system is unstructured and chunks swarms through the overlay topology
    • No fixed distribution tree
    • Each peer is connected to a subset of the other peers
      • Neighborhoods are stable (in this study)
  • Peers are autonomous and not synchronized: they evolve solely based on the protocol, no other coordination supposed

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

network model
Network Model
  • We consider an n-regular topology with symmetric connectivity
    • Good approx. of a random topology
    • Easy to construct and maintain
  • Access is the bottleneck and ADSL-like
  • Both upload and download bandwidth follow a simplified reservation sharing mechanism (on UDP)
  • Congestion is avoided setting a maximum to parallel transmissions

3-regular topology

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

chunk trading
Chunk Trading
  • Each peer
    • Receives chunks from the other peers
    • Redistributes chunks to neighbour peers
  • Two main drivers of the Chunk Trading Logic:
    • The protocol
    • The scheduling (local choices of Peers and Chunks)
  • We focus here on the protocol
    • Scheduling is “plain” (or trivial if you prefer)
  • Major “fights” discuss benefits of Push or Pull-based protocols (these latter called also data-driven ... with no reason )
  • Indeed there is no reason to use one OR the other, they can be mixed in the same application

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

traded push pull
Traded Push & Pull

Peers to trade with are

chosen at random, or

may follow some “logic”: distance, av. bandwidth,

delay, ...

Push can also be “blind” (many

studies assume so), but

duplicated chunks waste bandwidth

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

node active and passive behavior
Node Active and Passive Behavior

Peers transmit and receive chuncks

Peers transmit offers/requests:

they are active protocol entities

(or clients in Internet terminology)

the node starts

requests/offers

Peers satisfy offers/requests:

they are passive protocol entities

(or servers in Internet terminology)

the node receives

requests/offers

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

selecting peers and chunks
Selecting Peers and Chunks
  • Peers are selected in the neighborhood
    • At random – R
    • Following a distribution weighted by 1/RTT: Delay Aware – D
    • Selected peers are “poisoned” to avoid deterministic patterns and starvations (e.g. one peer very close and the others far away)
  • In Push: chunks are offered selecting the w most recent available
  • In Pull: chunks are requested selecting the w most needed, i.e., those closer to the playout time (or oldest)
  • Push and Pull phases are asynchronous and compete for the bandwidth resources
    • Offers are put forward and requests satisfied only if there are available resources on the local link
    • Model suitable for applications that enforce some sort of shaping
  • Signaling and data transmission are sequential

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

the role of push and pull diffusion delay distribution
The role of Push and Pull: Diffusion delay distribution
  • RTT = [10,250] ms
  • = 1,1

Bp = 1.9 ... 3.4 Bs

Peer Choice = R

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

the impact of r d parallel tx a and window w

D

R

The impact of R/D, parallel tx. a, and window w

RTT = [10,250] ms

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

tail behavior 95 th percentile different rtts

Delay Aware

bandwidth reduction

Tail Behavior: 95-th percentile, different RTTs

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

summary and future work summary
Summary and Future Work – Summary
  • Analysis and insight in a flexible protocol (Push/Pull) for P2P streaming
  • Assessment of the impact (very positive) of selecting peers in your neighborhood based on their RTT, one of the few easy-to-measure network characteristics
  • Study of some tuning parameters of the basic protocol

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

summary and future work work
Summary and Future Work – Work ...
  • Implementation of Push/Pull in GRAPES libraries: done! http://napa-wine.eu
  • Implementation of P2PTV streamers in NAPA-WINE peers based on Push/Pull protocols, to compare with other offer/select protocols: under wayhttp://napa-wine.eu
  • Exploration of tradeoffs between building delay-aware topologies with random peer choice, vs. random topologies vs delay-aware peers selection: to be done
  • Integration of delay-aware techniques with other network-aware strategies: in discussion & first tests
  • Improvements and open issues for parallel signaling and chunk transfer: under way (both simulation & implementation)

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010

the end
THE END

Thank you!

Questions?

Comments?

www.disi.unitn.it/locigno ICC 2010 - NGS, Cape Town, June 26 2010