skip to main content
10.1145/2393347.2393387acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Leveraging social network concepts for efficient peer-to-peer live streaming systems

Published: 29 October 2012 Publication History

Abstract

In current peer-to-peer (P2P) live streaming systems, nodes in a channel form a P2P overlay for video sharing. To watch a new channel, a node depends on the centralized server to join in the overlay of the channel. The increase in the number of channels in today's live streaming applications triggers users' desire of watching multiple channels successively or simultaneously. However, the support of such watching modes in current applications is no better than joining in different channel overlays successively or simultaneously, which if widely used, poses heavy burden on the centralized server. In order to achieve higher efficiency and scalability, we propose a Social network-Aided efficient liVe strEaming system (SAVE). SAVE regards users' channel switching or multi-channel watching as interactions between channels. By collecting the information of channel interactions and nodes' interests and watching times, SAVE forms nodes in multiple channels with frequent interactions into an overlay, constructs bridges between overlays of channels with less frequent interactions, and enables nodes to identify friends sharing similar interests and watching times. Thus, a node can connect to a new channel while staying in its current overlay, using bridges or relying on its friends, reducing the need to contact the centralized server. Extensive experimental results from the PeerSim simulator and PlanetLab verify that SAVE outperforms other popular protocols in system efficiency and server load reduction.

References

[1]
PPLive. http://www.pplive.com.
[2]
UUSee. http://www.uusee.com.
[3]
PPStream. http://www.ppstream.com.
[4]
F. Dobrian, V. Sekar, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. In Proc. of SIGCOMM, 2011.
[5]
X. Cheng and J. Liu. Nettube: Exploring social networks for peer-to-peer short video sharing. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2009.
[6]
M. Mcpherson. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1):415--444, 2001.
[7]
C. Wilson, B. Boe, A. Sala, K. P.N. Puttaswamy, and B. Y. Zhao. User interactions in social networks and their implications. In Proc. of EuroSys, pages 205--218, 2009.
[8]
A. Fast, D. Jensen, and B. Levine. Creating social networks to improve peer-to-peer networking. In Proc. of SIGKDD, 2005.
[9]
A. Iamnitchi, M. Ripeanu, and I. Foster. Small-World File-Sharing Communities. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2004.
[10]
J. Kleinberg. The small-world phenomenon: An algorithmic perspective. In Proc. of STOC, pages 163--170, 2000.
[11]
S. Milgram. The small world problem. Psychology Today, 1967.
[12]
The PeerSim simulator. http://peersim.sf.net.
[13]
PlanetLab. http://www.planet-lab.org/.
[14]
Y. Chu, A. Ganjam, T. Ng, S. Rao, K. Sripanidkulchai, J. Zhang, and H. Zhang. Early experience with an internet broadcast system based on overlay multicast. In Proc. of USENIX, 2004.
[15]
S. Banerjee, B. Bhattacharjee, and C. Kommareddy. Scalable application layer multicast. In Proc. of SIGCOMM, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2002.
[16]
Y. Chu, S. Rao, and H. Zhang. A case for end system multicast. In Proc. of ACM SIGMETRICS, 2000.
[17]
D. Tran, K. Hua, and T. Do. Zigzag: An efficient peer-to-peer scheme for media streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2003.
[18]
V. N. Padmanabhan, H. J. Wang, P. A. Chou, and K. Sripanid-kulchai. Distributed streaming media content using cooperative networking. In Proc. of ACM NOSSDAV, 2002.
[19]
M. Castro, P. Druschel, A. Kermarrec, A. Nandi, A. Rowstron, and A. Singh. Splitstream: High-bandwidth multicast in cooperative environments. In Proc. of SOSP, 2003.
[20]
S. Asaduzzaman, Y. Qiao, and G. Bochmann. CliqueStream: an efficient and fault-resilient live streaming network on a clustered peer-to-peer overlay. In Proc. of P2P, 2008.
[21]
X. Zhang, J. Liu, B. Li, and T. P. Yum. CoolStreaming/DONet: a data-driven overlay network for peer-to-peer live media streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2005.
[22]
X. Liao, H. Jin, Y. Liu, L. M. Ni, and D. Deng. AnySee: Peer-to-Peer Live Streaming. In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, 2006.
[23]
V. Pai, K. Kumar, K. Tamilmani, V. Sambamurthy, and A. E. Mohr. Chainsaw: eliminating trees from overlay multicast. In Proc. of IPTPS, 2005.
[24]
T. Locher, S. Schmid, and R. Wattenhofer. eQuus: a provably robust and locality-aware peer-to-peer system. In Proc. of P2P, 2006.
[25]
Y. Guo, C. Liang, and Y. Liu. Adaptive queue-based chunk scheduling for P2P live streaming. In Proc. of IFIP Networking, 2008.
[26]
L. Massoulie, A. Twig, C. Gkantsidis, and P. Rodriguez. Randomized decentralized broadcasting algorithms. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2007.
[27]
F. Picconi and L. Massoulie. Is there a future for mesh-based live video streaming? In Proc. of P2P, 2008.
[28]
N. Magharei and R. Rejaie. PRIME: peer-to-peer receiver-driven mesh-based streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2007.
[29]
J. Venkataraman and P. Francis. Chunkyspread: multi-tree unstructured peer-to-peer multicast. In Proc. of IPTPS, 2006.
[30]
F. Wang, Y. Xiong, and J. Liu. mTreebone: a hybrid tree/mesh overlay for application-layer live video multicast. In Proc. of ICDCS, 2007.
[31]
F. Wang, J. Liu, and Y. Xiong. Stable Peers: Existence, Importance, and Application in Peer-to-Peer Live Video Streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, pages 1364--1372, 2008.
[32]
J. Mol, A. Bakker, J. Pouwelse, D. Epema, and H. Sips. The design and deployment of a bittorrent live video streaming solution. In Proc. of ICM, 2009.
[33]
Y. Liu. Delay bounds of chunk-based peer-to-peer video streaming. TON, 18(4):1195--1206, 2010.
[34]
H. Shen, L. Zhao, Z. Li, and J. Li. A DHT-Aided Chunk-Driven Overlay for Scalable and Efficient Peer-to-Peer Live Streaming. In Proc. of ICPP, 2010.
[35]
C. Wu and B. Li. Strategies of conflict in coexisting streaming overlays. In Proc. of INFOCOM, pages 481--489, 2007.
[36]
C. Wu, B. Li, and Z. Li. Dynamic bandwidth auctions in multioverlay p2p streaming with network coding. IEEE TPDS, 2008.
[37]
C. Wu, B. Li, and S. Zhao. Multi-channel live P2P streaming: Refocusing on servers. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2008.
[38]
M., L. Xu, and B. Ramamurthy. Flexible divide-and-conquer protocol for multi-view peer-to-peer live streaming. In Proc. of P2P, 2009.
[39]
M. Wang, L. Xu, and B. Ramamurthy. Linear Programming Models For Multi-Channel P2P Streaming Systems. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2010.
[40]
X. Cheng, C. Dale, and J. Liu. Statistics and social network of youtube videos. In Proc. of IWQoS, 2008.
[41]
R. Gomory and T. Hu. Multi-Terminal Network Flows. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 9(4):551--570, 1961.
[42]
Surveymonkey: Free online survey software and questionnaire tool. http://www.surveymonkey.com/.
[43]
F. Wang, J. Liu, and Y. Xiong. Stable peers: existence, importance, and application in peer-to-peer live video streaming. In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, 2008.
[44]
C. Huang, J. Li, and K. W. Ross. Can internet video-on-demand be profitable? In Proc. of SIGCOMM, 2007.
[45]
The difference between upload and download speed for broadband DSL. http://www.broadbandinfo.com/cable/speed-test.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
MM '12: Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Multimedia
October 2012
1584 pages
ISBN:9781450310895
DOI:10.1145/2393347
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 October 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. P2P live streaming
  2. P2P networks
  3. social networks

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

MM '12
Sponsor:
MM '12: ACM Multimedia Conference
October 29 - November 2, 2012
Nara, Japan

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,145 of 8,556 submissions, 25%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2017)iASKIEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems10.1109/TPDS.2016.261886428:5(1346-1360)Online publication date: 1-May-2017
  • (2015)Social-P2P: An Online Social Network Based P2P File Sharing SystemIEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems10.1109/TPDS.2014.235902026:10(2874-2889)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2015
  • (2015)A social-network-aided efficient peer-to-peer live streaming systemIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2014.231143123:3(987-1000)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2015
  • (2013)Nash bargaining between friends for cooperative data distribution in a social peer-to-peer swarming system2013 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics10.1109/ICMLC.2013.6890840(1490-1495)Online publication date: Jul-2013

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media