Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adaptive content-and-deadline aware chunk scheduling in mesh-based P2P video streaming

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In mesh-based Peer-to-Peer (P2P) live video streaming systems packet scheduling is an important factor in overall video playback quality. In mesh based P2P video streaming systems, each video sequence is divided into chunks, which are then distributed by multiple suppliers to the receivers. The suppliers need to be coordinated by the receiver through specifying a transmission schedule for each of them. Many previous studies on scheduling of P2P streaming tend to mainly focus on networking issues which strongly depend on a particular P2P architecture such as tree or mesh. These algorithms suffer from some design issues: 1) they are too complex to deploy, 2) they do not take video characteristics into account and 3) they do not have sender-side transmission policy. To address all three of these problems, we propose a new chunk scheduling scheme which consists of two parts: i) receiver-side scheduler and ii) sender-side transmission order scheme. The proposed receiver-side scheduler considers the contribution level of each video frame as well as the frame’s urgency in order to define a priority for each video frame. It attempts to request frames with highest priority from peers which can deliver them in a shorter time. We also design a new chunk transmission order scheme that decides which requested chunk will be sent out first based on its importance to the requesting neighbor. Our simulation results show that the proposed scheduling scheme improves the overall quality of the perceived video in mesh-based P2P video streaming architectures substantially.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (2005) Meridian node to node latency matrix (2500x2500). http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/meridian/data.php, accessed: 2015-03-15

  2. (2005) Video traces. http://www.tkn.tu-berlin.de/research/trace/trace.html, accessed: 2015-03-15

  3. (2015) Denacast. http://ece.modares.ac.ir/denacast/

  4. (2015) GT-ITM topologies for the omnet++ simulation platform and oversim framework. http://mm.aueb.gr/research/GTITM-OMNeT4/

  5. (2015) OMNeT++ Network Simulation Framework. http://www.omnetpp.org/

  6. (2015) PPLive. http://www.pptv.com/

  7. Agarwal V, Rejaie R (2005) Adaptive multi-source streaming in heterogeneous peer-to-peer networks. In: SPIE Conference on Multimedia Computing and Networking

  8. Akbari B, Rabiee HR, Ghanbari M (2008) An optimal discrete rate allocation for overlay video multicasting. Comput Commun 31(3):551–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Annapureddy S, Guha S, Gkantsidis C, Gunawardena D, Rodriguez P (2007) Is high-quality vod feasible using p2p swarming? ACM

  10. Baccichet P, Noh J, Setton E, Girod B (2007) Content-aware p2p video streaming with low latency. In: ICME. IEEE

  11. Baumgart I, Heep B, Krause S (2009) Oversim: A scalable and flexible overlay framework for simulation and real network applications. In: Peer-to-Peer Computing. IEEE

  12. Castro M, Druschel P, Kermarrec A M, Nandi A, Rowstron A, Singh A (2003) Splitstream: High-bandwidth multicast in cooperative environments. SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev 37(5):298– 313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chakareski J, Frossard P (2009) Utility-based packet scheduling in p2p mesh-based multicast

  14. Chu YH, Rao SG, Seshan S, 0001 HZ (2002) A case for end system multicast. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 20(8):1456–1471

  15. Hefeeda M, Habib A, Botev B, Xu D, Bhargava B (2003) Promise: Peer-to-peer media streaming using collectcast. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Multimedia, ACM, MULTIMEDIA ’03

  16. Hsu CH, Hefeeda M (2010) Quality-aware segment transmission scheduling in peer-to-peer streaming systems. In: MMSys. ACM

  17. Hua KL, Chiu GM, Pao HK, Cheng YC (2013) An efficient scheduling algorithm for scalable video streaming over p2p networks. Comput Netw 57(14):2856–2868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kowalski G, Hefeeda M (2009) Empirical analysis of multi-sender segment transmission algorithms in peer-to-peer streaming. In: ISM. IEEE Computer Society

  19. Liang C, Guo Y, Liu Y (2008) Is random scheduling sufficient in p2p video streaming? IEEE Computer Society

  20. Lima L, Dalai M, Leonardi R, Migliorati P, Bernardini R, Rinaldo R (2013) Optimal rate allocation for p2p video streaming. IEEE Sel Areas Commun 31(9)

  21. Liu B, Cui Y, Chang B, Gotow B, Xue Y (2008) Bittube Case study of a web-based peer-assisted video-on-demand system. IEEE Computer Society

  22. Liu J, Rao SG, Li B, Zhang H (2007) Opportunities and challenges of peer-to-peer internet video broadcast. In: In (invited) Proceedings of the IEEE, Special Issue on Recent Advances in Distributed Multimedia Communications

  23. Magharei N, Rejaie R (2007) PRIME: Peer-to-Peer Receiver-drIven MEsh-based Streaming. In: Proceedings of IEEE Infocom

  24. Magharei N, Rejaie R, Guo Y (2007) Mesh or multiple-tree: a comparative study of live p2p streaming approaches. In: INFOCOM 2007. 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE

  25. Padmanabhan VN, Wang HJ, Chou PA, Sripanidkulchai K (2002) Distributing streaming media content using cooperative networking. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video, ACM, NOSSDAV ’02

  26. Pai VS, Kumar K, Tamilmani K, Sambamurthy V, Mohr AE (2005) Chainsaw: eliminating trees from overlay multicast. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3640. Springer

  27. Pianese F, Perino D, Keller J, Biersack EW (2007) Pulse: an adaptive, incentive-based, unstructured p2p live streaming system. IEEE Trans Multimedia 9(8):1645–1660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ramzan N, Park H, Izquierdo E (2012) Video streaming over p2p networks: challenges and opportunities. Image Commun 27(5):401–411

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schwarz H, Marpe D, Wiegand T (2007) Overview of the scalable video coding extension of the h.264/avc standard. In: IEEE Transactions on circuits and systems for video technology in circuits and systems for video technology

  30. Setton E, Noh J, Girod B (2005) Rate-distortion optimized video peer-to-peer multicast streaming. In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Advances in Peer-to-peer Multimedia Streaming, ACM, P2PMMS’05

  31. Shen H, Li Z, Li J (2013) A dht-aided chunk-driven overlay for scalable and efficient peer-to-peer live streaming. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 24(11):2125–2137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shen Z, Luo J, Zimmermann R, Vasilakos AV (2011) Peer-to-peer media streaming: insights and new developments. Proc IEEE 99(12):2089–2109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vari I (2015) INET framework for omnet++. http://inet.omnetpp.org

  34. Wang F, Xiong Y, Liu J (2010) mtreebone: a collaborative tree-mesh overlay network for multicast video streaming. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 21(3)

  35. Wang M, Xu L, Ramamurthy B (2013) Exploring the design space of multichannel peer-to-peer live video streaming systems. IEEE/ACM Trans Networking 21(1):162–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wu D, Liang C, Liu Y, Ross KW (2009) View-upload decoupling: a redesign of multi-channel p2p video systems. In: INFOCOM, IEEE

  37. Zhang M, Zhang Q, Sun L, Yang S (2007) Understanding the power of pull-based streaming protocol: can we do better? IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 25(9):1678–1694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang M, Xiong Y, Zhang Q, Sun L, Yang S (2009) Optimizing the throughput of data-driven peer-to-peer streaming. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 20(1):97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhang X, Liu J, Li B, Shing PYT (2005) Coolstreaming/donet: a data-driven overlay network for peer-to-peer live media streaming. In: IEEE Infocom

  40. Zou J, Chen L (2014) Joint bandwidth allocation, data scheduling and incentives for scalable video streaming over peer-to-peer networks. Multimedia Tools Appl 73(3):1269–1289

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

    Minoo Kargar Bideh, Behzad Akbari & Abdollah Ghaffari Sheshjavani

Authors
  1. Minoo Kargar Bideh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Behzad Akbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Abdollah Ghaffari Sheshjavani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Behzad Akbari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bideh, M.K., Akbari, B. & Sheshjavani, A.G. Adaptive content-and-deadline aware chunk scheduling in mesh-based P2P video streaming. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 9, 436–448 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-015-0355-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-015-0355-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation