1 / 22

Experiences with Multimedia Streaming over 2.5G and 3G Networks

Experiences with Multimedia Streaming over 2.5G and 3G Networks. J. Chesterfield, R. Chakravorty, J. Crowcroft, P. Rodriguez, S. Banerjee Presented by Denny Iskandar. 1. Introduction. What? Evaluates performance of multimedia streaming over wireless network. Why?

fariasc
Download Presentation

Experiences with Multimedia Streaming over 2.5G and 3G Networks

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Experiences with Multimedia Streaming over 2.5G and 3G Networks J. Chesterfield, R. Chakravorty, J. Crowcroft, P. Rodriguez, S. Banerjee Presented by Denny Iskandar

  2. 1. Introduction • What? • Evaluates performance of multimedia streaming over wireless network. • Why? • 2.5G and 3G technologies are being deployed everywhere (Europe, America, and Asia) • Popularity of multimedia applications such as videoconferencing, Voice over IP, and audio/video broadcasting

  3. 1. Introduction • Scope of experiment • Measurements from real networks: • The effect of heterogeneity of network is captured by comparison across different network technologies: (GSM), GPRS, and UMTS. • Describes the importance of cooperation between network and application using an application called vorbistreamer.

  4. Application layer Presentation layer Session layer Transport layer Network layer Data link layer Physical layer Roadmap • Introduction • Network measurements • Application measurements • Conclusions

  5. 2. Network Measurements • Multimedia traffic characterization • Assume layered organization of media • Bandwidth used ranges between a minimum and a maximum target rate.

  6. 2. Network Measurements 2.1 Propagation delay and jitter

  7. 2. Network Measurements 2.1 Propagation delay and jitter

  8. 2. Network Measurements 2.1 Propagation delay and jitter • Compare with ITU recommendation for voice communications: RTT ≤ 500 ms • Note: For GPRS, disabling ARQ reduces jitter at the cost of higher packet loss rate (around 3%).

  9. 2. Network Measurements 2.2 Capacity variation

  10. 2. Network Measurements 2.2 Capacity variation

  11. 2. Network Measurements 2.3 Summary • Propagation delay and delay jitter are reduced as link capacity increases. • GPRS should disable ARQ for multimedia application. • Sub-packet error detection [1] improves performance. [1] J. Chesterfield, R. Chakravorty, S. Banerjee, P. Rodriguez and I. Pratt. Transport Level Optimisations for Interactive Media Streaming Over Wide-Area Wireless Networks. In WiOpt ’04, 2004.

  12. 3. Application Measurements • Use Vorbis codec • A layered codec, encodes data into a base layer and enhancement layers

  13. 3. Application Measurements • Design of vorbistreamer • Implements IP-based data striping; this is used to aggregate channel bandwidth. • Uses RTP as transport protocol. • Supports interactivity constraints from fully interactive communication to one-way streaming. • Uses Vorbis codec.

  14. 3. Application Measurements • Encoding techniques • For multimedia application, reliability is disabled • Needs to add redundancy to multimedia data to facilitate receiver-based repairs • Also involves interleaving of encoding blocks to reduce the effect of error burst

  15. 3. Application Measurements 3.1 Intra-packet redundancy (UEP) Vorbis frame Header Base layer EL1 EL2 ... ELn FEC1 FEC2 frame1 n-2 frames RLC packets FEC blocks

  16. 3. Application Measurements • Things to note: • This “bucketing” is done at application layer, the actual RLC packetization is done at link layer. • Multiple layers in one packet to minimize header overhead.

  17. 3. Application Measurements 3.2 Inter-packet redundancy • Cross-packet coding • Sends parity data in separate packets than the original data. original data parity data d • The greater d is: • The more effective recovery • The greater recovery delay

  18. 3. Application Measurements 3.2 Inter-packet redundancy • Cross-channel coding • From tests, it is more likely that error occurs to A and B than to B and C A B channel 1 C channel 2

  19. 3. Application Measurements 3.3 Interleaving • Intra-packet: change the order of frames in the same packet • Inter-packet: change the order of packets in the same channel • Inter-channel: 5 7 3 1 channel 1 6 8 4 2 channel 2

  20. 3. Application Measurements 3.4 Comparison

  21. 4. Conclusions • The need for cooperation between network and application. • Encoding and organization of multimedia data is important. • Benefits from aggregating independent channels. • Benefits from sub-packet error detection.

  22. 5. Related works [1] J. Chesterfield, R. Chakravorty, S. Banerjee, P. Rodriguez and I. Pratt. Transport Level Optimisations for Interactive Media Streaming Over Wide-Area Wireless Networks. In WiOpt’04: Modelling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks, 2004. [2] R. Chakravorty, J. Chesterfield, P. Rodriguez and S. Banerjee. Measurement Approaches to Evaluate Performance Optimizations for Wide-Area Wireless Networks. In Passive and Active Network Measurement (PAM 2004) 5th International Workshop, 2004.

More Related