Abstract
Live streaming media is delay sensitive with small allowable delay. Current conventional multicast protocols do not provide a loss retransmission mechanism. Even there are some researches on a reliable multicast providing a loss retransmission mechanism but a long delay and a high packet loss rate make them inefficient for live streaming. This paper proposes a new multicast protocol based on a protocol relay concept. The proposed protocol focusing on allowable delay provides Quality of Service (QoS) for live streaming. Relay nodes are placed along the multicast tree. Data recovery is done between relay nodes. We propose the methods that enable protocol relays to request retransmission immediately and reduce the number of duplicate packets. Finally, we make a mathematical analysis of the proposed protocol and compare it with other multicast protocols. The results show that the proposed protocol is more efficient for live streaming than the conventional protocols.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
G. Carle and E.W. Biersack, “Survey of Error Recovery Techniques for IPbased Audio-Visual Multicast Applications”, IEEE Network, vol.11, no.6, pp.24–36, Nov./Dec. 1977.
H. Otsuki, A. Kobayashi, K. Yamaoka and Y. Sakai, “A Real-time Media Stream Transfer Protocol Using IP Proxy with Finite Retransmission between Relay Nodes”, In Proc. of CQR 2002 Workshop, Okinawa, Japan, May 2002.
L.H. Sahasrabuddhe and B. Mukherjee, “Multicast Routing Algorithms and Protocols: A Tutorial”, IEEE Network, vol.14, no.1, pp.90–102, January/February 2000.
K. Obraczka, “Multicast Transport Protocols: A Survey and Taxonomy”, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol.36, no.1, pp. 94–102, January 1998.
S.K. Kasera, J. Kurose and D. Towsley, “A Comparison of Server-Based and Receiver-Based Local Recovery Approaches for Scalable Reliable Multicast”, In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, San Francisco, CA, USA, March 1998.
J. Nonnenmacher, M. Jung, E.W. Biersack and G. Carle, “How Bad is Reliable Multicast without Local Recovery?”, In Proc. of INFOCOM’ 98, San Francisco, April 1998.
P. Radoslavov, C. Papadopoulos, R. Govindan, D. Estrin, “A Comparison of Application-Level and Router-Assisted Hierarchical Schemes for Reliable Multicast”, In Proc. INFOCOM’ 01, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 2001.
M. Schuba and P. Reichl, “An Analysis of Retransmission Strategies for Reliable Multicast Protocols”, In Proc. International Conference on Performance of Information and Communication Systems PICS’98, Lund, Sweden, May 1998. http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/~reichl/
A.P. Markopoulou and F.A. Tobagi, “Hierarchical Reliable Multcast: Perfomance Analysis and Placement of Proxies”, In Proc. of International Workshop on Networked Group Communication NGC 2000, Standford University, Palo Alto, California, USA, November 2000. http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/ngc2000/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Somchit, Y., Kobayashi, A., Yamaoka, K., Sakai, Y. (2003). A Proposal for a Multicast Protocol for Live Media. In: Marsan, M.A., Corazza, G., Listanti, M., Roveri, A. (eds) Quality of Service in Multiservice IP Networks. QoS-IP 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2601. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36480-3_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36480-3_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-00604-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36480-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive