1 / 28

Performance analysis of video streaming on different hybrid CDN & P2P infrastructure

Performance analysis of video streaming on different hybrid CDN & P2P infrastructure. Presenter: Kuei -Yu Hsu Advisor: Dr. Kai-Wei Ke 2013/9/30. Outline. Introduction Proposed Methods Simulation Model Simulation Results Conclusions References. Introduction. Client-Server Architecture

leoma
Download Presentation

Performance analysis of video streaming on different hybrid CDN & P2P infrastructure

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. Performance analysis of video streaming on different hybrid CDN & P2P infrastructure Presenter: Kuei-Yu Hsu Advisor: Dr. Kai-Wei Ke 2013/9/30

  2. Outline • Introduction • Proposed Methods • Simulation Model • Simulation Results • Conclusions • References

  3. Introduction Client-Server Architecture Content Delivery Network (CDN) Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Network Hybrid CDN & P2P

  4. Client-Server Architecture • ANYONEcan access the video/audio content freely from Internet ANYTIMEand ANYWHERE. • The traditional Client-Server architecture can't afford the number of growing users.

  5. Content Delivery Network (CDN) • The key point of the CDN: • Replicatethe content from the original content server at its local cache. • Distributethe content to clients.

  6. Content Delivery Network (CDN) • CDNBenefits: • Maximizing bandwidth utilization • Reducing the response time for the end-users • Achieving higher throughput through replicating content

  7. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Network • P2P architecture is applicable on the client side of the network. • Clients become activeassociates by transmitting received content to other clients.

  8. Hybrid CDN & P2P Server:CDN → Client:P2P →

  9. Proposed Method Dynamic Mobile Server (DMS) Proposed DMS

  10. Dynamic Mobile Server(DMS) • Mobile Server (MS): A server application at the strategic network location to provide service. • Service includes serving contents, providing computation, routing traffic etc. • Here focus on serving content in a hierarchicalmanner, as opposed to mesh style in the typical P2P approach.

  11. Proposed DMS • Workload of the nearest CDN server and network will decrease and hence allowing clients to be served.

  12. Simulation Model Scenario 1: CDN-P2P Scenario 2: CDN-DMS Simulation parameters

  13. Simulation Model • Network simulator: ns-2 • Two types of scenario on the client-side: • P2P mesh • DMS • 15 clients: • 10clients receive video content • 3clients receive Voice over IP (VoIP) data • 2clients download some files via FTP

  14. Simulation Model (cont.) • 4 domains:content domain, CDN domain, ISPdomain and clientdomain. b CDN Domain VoIP server d a CDN server c Content Domain FTP server ISP Domain FTP Client & VoIP Client Client Domain Media Client

  15. Scenario 1: CDN-P2P

  16. Scenario 2: CDN-DMS

  17. Simulation parameters

  18. Simulation Results

  19. Simulation Results • Performance indicators for video quality measurement: • average packet loss ratio • average frame loss ratio • average PSNR • The raw video and received video of both CDN-P2P and CDN-DMS can be differentiated with the computation of PSNR(Peak Signal to Noise Ratio). ↙ -1 ↖ MSE(MeanSquareError)

  20. Simulation Results (cont.)

  21. Simulation Results (cont.)

  22. Simulation Results (cont.)

  23. Simulation Results (cont.)

  24. Conclusions

  25. Conclusions • This paper has conducted a simulation study to evaluate two content distribution approaches, namely P2P and DMS. • Simulations were measured in PSNR graph for video quality and also average frame loss ratio, average packet loss ratio and average PSNR. • Results showed that CDN-DMS achieved betterperformance as compared to CDN-P2P in PSNR metric.

  26. References

  27. References • A. Passarella, “A Survey on Content-centric Technologies for the Current Internet: CDN and P2P solutions”, International Journal of Computer Communications, October, 2011. • Hassan, M.M.; ChoongKhongNeng; Lee Cheng Suan, “Performance analysis of video streaming on different hybrid CDN & P2P infrastructure”, Wireless Communications and Applications (ICWCA 2012), IET International Conference, p.1,6, 8-10 Oct. 2012

  28. Thanks for listening

More Related