Minimizing the In-Cloud Bandwidth for On-Demand Reactive and Proactive Streaming Applications
Source abstract
Abstract
Video streaming services are one of the most resource-consuming applications on the Internet. Thus, minimizing the consumed resources at runtime in general and the server/network bandwidth in particular are still challenging for researchers. Currently, most streaming techniques used on the Internet open one stream per client request, which makes the consumed bandwidth increases linearly. Hence, many broadcasting/streaming protocols have been proposed in the literature to minimize the streaming bandwidth. These protocols can be divided into two main categories, namely, reactive and proactive broadcasting protocols. While the first category is recommended for streaming unpopular videos, the second category is recommended for streaming popular videos. In this context, in this paper we propose an enhanced version of the reactive protocol Slotted Stream Tapping (SST) called Share All SST (SASST), which we prove to further reduce the streaming bandwidth with regard to SST. We also propose a new proactive protocol named the New Optimal Proactive Protocol (NOPP) based on an optimal scheduling of video segments on streaming-channel. SASST and NOPP are to be used in cloud and CDN (content delivery network) networks where the IP multicast or multicast HTTP on QUIC could be enabled, as their key principle is to allow the sharing of ongoing streams among clients requesting the same video content. Thus, clients and servers are often services running on virtual machines or in containers belonging to the same cloud or CDN infrastructure.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Caching and Content Delivery · Image and Video Quality Assessment · Software-Defined Networks and 5G
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Software Engineering Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 51178, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia
Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Saud University, P.O. Box 800, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia
Computer Engineering Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 51178, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia
Department of Information Technology, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 51178, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia
Funding
Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University
References (53)
Show source-provided references
1. (2021, July 01). Cisico: Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018–2023) White Paper. Available online: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/executive-perspectives/annual-internet-report/white-paper-c11-741490.html.
2. (2021, January 06). Adobe. Available online: http://www.adobe.com/products/hds-dynamic-streaming.html.
3. (2021, January 06). Apple: HTTP Live Streaming. Available online: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-12.
4. (2020, January 06). Microsoft. Available online: http://www.iis.net/downloads/microsoft/smooth-streaming.
5. Stockhammer, T. (2011, January 23–25). Dynamic adaptive streaming over http–: Standards and design principles. Proceedings of the Second Annual ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems, San Jose, CA, USA.10.1145/1943552.1943572 ↗
6. Carter, S.W., Long, D.D.E., and Pâris, J.F. (2020, January 06). Video-on-Demand Broadcasting Protocols. Available online: citeseer.ist.psu.edu/carter00videodemand.html.
7. Pardue, L., Bradbury, R., and Hurst, S. (2021, November 20). Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) over Multicast QUIC Internet Engineering Task Force. Draft-Pardue-Quic-http-Mcast-09. Available online: https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-pardue-quic-http-mcast-09.html.
8. Comparison of stream merging algorithms for media-on-demand
9. Carter, S.R., Paris, J.F., Mohan, S., and Long, D.D.E. (2001, January 7–10). A dynamic heuristic broadcasting protocol for video-on-demand. Proceedings of the IEEE 21st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS ’01), Washington, DC, USA.
10. Eager, D., Vernon, M., and Zahorjan, J. (November, January 30). Optimal and Efficient Merging Schedules for Video-on-Demand Servers. Proceedings of the Seventh ACM International Conference on Multimedia (Part 1), Orlando, FL, USA. Available online: http://www.cs.usask.ca/faculty/eager.
11. Gazdar, A., and Belghith, A. (2004, January 15). Slotted stream tapping. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Workshop on Next-Generation Residential Broadband Challenges (NRBC ’04), New York, NY, USA.10.1145/1026763.1026774 ↗
12. The split and merge protocol for interactive video-on-demand10.1109/93.641879 ↗
13. Pâris, J.F., Carter, S.W., and Long, D.D.E. (August, January 30). A universal distribution protocol for video-on-demand. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo 2000, New York, NY, USA.
14. Pâris, J.F., and Long, D.D.E. (2006, January 9–12). An analytic study of stream tapping protocols. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME 2006), Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1109/ICME.2006.262761 ↗
15. Carter, S.W., and Long, D.D.E. (1997, January 22–25). Improving video-on-demand server effeciency through stream tapping. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Communications and Netrworks (ICCCN’97), Las Vegas, NV, USA.
16. Aggarwal, C.C., Wolf, J.L., and Yu, P.S. (1996, January 17–23). A permutation-based pyramid broadcasting scheme for video-on-demand systems. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Computing Systems, Hiroshima, Japan.
17. Belghith, A., and Gazdar, A. (2007, January 15–18). Generalization of fixed delay broadcasting protocols. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Information Systems, Cairo, Egypt.
18. Hu, A. (2001, January 22–26). Video-on-Demand broadcasting protocols: A comprehensive study. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Infocom’01), Anchorage, AK, USA.
19. Skyscraper broadcasting: A new broadcasting scheme for metropolitan video-on-demand systems10.1145/263109.263144 ↗
20. Juhn, L.S., and Tseng, L.M. (1997, January 27–29). Fast broadcasting for hot video access. Proceedings of the Internantional Workshop on Real-Time Computing Systems and Application, Taipel, Taiwan.
21. Harmonic broadcasting for video-on-demand service10.1109/11.632927 ↗
22. Pyramid broadcasting for video-on-demand service
23. Gazdar, A., and Belghith, A. (2004, January 18–21). Hybrid broadcasting protocols: A comparative study. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology (ISSPIT ’04), Rome, Italy.
24. Amazon (2021, July 05). Amazon Cloudfront Media Streaming Tutorials. Available online: https://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/streaming/.
25. IBM (2021, January 10). IBM Video Streaming Developers. Available online: https://developers.video.ibm.com.
26. Microsoft (2021, January 10). Azure Documentation. Available online: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/?product=media.
27. Google (2021, January 10). Video AI. Available online: https://cloud.google.com/video-intelligence.
28. Topology-aware multi-objective virtual machine dynamic consolidation for cloud datacenter
29. Multi-objective communication-aware optimization for virtual machine placement in cloud datacenters
30. Optimal vm placement in distributed cloudenvironment using moea/d10.1007/s00500-018-03686-6 ↗
31. Tian, H., Wu, J., and Shen, H. (2017, January 18–20). Efficient algorithms for vm placement in cloud data centers. Proceedings of the 2017 18th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing, Applications and Technologies (PDCAT), Taipei, Taiwan.10.1109/PDCAT.2017.00021 ↗
32. Virtual network embedding on massive substrate networks10.1002/ett.3849 ↗
33. Some observations on optimal requency selection in dvfs-based energy consumption minimization10.1016/j.jpdc.2011.01.004 ↗
34. Energy-aware scheduling algorithm for time-constrained workflow tasks in dvfs-enabled cloud environment10.1016/j.simpat.2018.07.006 ↗
35. An energy-efficient, qos-aware and cost-effective scheduling approach for real-time workflow applications in cloud computing systems utilizing dvfs and approximate computations10.1016/j.future.2019.02.019 ↗
36. Soft error-aware energy-efficient task scheduling for workflow applications in dvfs-enabled cloud10.1016/j.sysarc.2018.03.001 ↗
37. How physical network topologies affect virtual network embedding quality: A characterization study based on isp and datacenter networks10.1016/j.jnca.2016.05.009 ↗
38. Virtual network embedding through topology-aware node ranking10.1145/1971162.1971168 ↗
39. Vineyard: Virtual network embedding algorithms with coordinated node and link mapping10.1109/TNET.2011.2159308 ↗
40. Virtual network embedding: A survey10.1109/SURV.2013.013013.00155 ↗
41. Li, J., Zhang, N., Ye, Q., Shi, W., Zhuang, W., and Shen, X. (2017, January 4–8). Joint resource allocation and online virtual network embedding for 5g networks. Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2017—2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Singapore.10.1109/GLOCOM.2017.8254072 ↗
42. Network Slicing and Softwarization: A Survey on Principles, Enabling Technologies, and Solutions10.1109/COMST.2018.2815638 ↗
43. bwSlicer: A bandwidth slicing framework for cloud data centers10.1016/j.future.2020.06.021 ↗
44. Gazdar, A., and Belghith, A. (2003, January 17–21). Etude et implémentation d’une solution interactive pour la diffusion de la vidéo dans les systèmes de vidéo à la demande. Proceedings of the 2003 Sciences of Electronic, Technologies of Information and Telecommunications (SETIT ’03), Sousse, Tunisia.
45. Gazdar, A., and Belghith, A. (2004, January 5–8). Discrete interactive staggered broadcasting. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC ’04), Las Vegas, NV, USA.
46. Gazdar, A., and Belghith, A. (2004, January 27–29). Une solution vod interactive continue. Proceedings of the 2004 Colloque Africain sur la Recherche en Informatique (CARI ’04), Hammamet, Tunisia.
47. Pâris, J.F., Carter, S.W., and Long, D.D.E. (1998, January 19–24). Efficient broadcasting protocols for video-on-demand. Proceedings of the the International Symposium on Modelling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computing and Telecom Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada.
48. Pâris, J.F., Carter, S.W., and Long, D.D.E. (1999, January 24–28). Combining pay-per-view and video-on-demand services. Proceedings of the Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, College Park, MD, USA.
49. Bar-Noy, A., and Ladner, R.E. (2002, January 6–8). Windows scheduling problems for broadcast systems. Proceedings of the 13th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), San Francisco, CA, USA.
50. Scheduling techniques for media-on-demand10.1007/s00453-007-9052-3 ↗
51. Pâris, J.F., Carter, S.W., and Long, D.D.E. (1998, January 12–15). A low bandwidth broadcasting protocol for video-on-demand. Proceedings of the the 7th International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks, Lafayette, LA, USA.
52. Yan, E.M., and Kameda, T. (2003, January 23). An efficient vod broadcasting scheme with user bandwidth limit. Proceedings of the SPIE/ACM MMCN 2003, Santa Carla, CA, USA.10.1117/12.483908 ↗
53. Gurobi Optimization, LLC (2021, July 05). Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual. Available online: https://www.gurobi.com.