confused timid and unstable picking a video streaming
play

Confused, Timid, and Unstable: Picking a Video Streaming Rate is - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Confused, Timid, and Unstable: Picking a Video Streaming Rate is Hard Five students from Stanford Published in 2012 ACMs Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) 23 citations Ahmad Tahir 1/26 o Problem o Background


  1. Confused, Timid, and Unstable: Picking a Video Streaming Rate is Hard Five students from Stanford • Published in 2012 • ACM’s Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) • 23 citations • Ahmad Tahir 1/26

  2. o Problem o Background Knowledge o Research Motivation o Experimental Setup o First Results The streaming video quality deteriorates when another competing flow for a o Downward Spiral limited bandwidth starts. o Intervention Maintaining a careful balance between: o Before, After  not wanting to cause a re-buffer  not wanting to deliver unnecessarily low quality 2/26

  3. o Problem Typical HTTP streaming setup o Background Knowledge Client must pick what to request • o Research Motivation o Experimental Setup Careful balance for user satisfaction • o First Results o Downward Spiral o Intervention o Before, After 3/26

  4.  Problem How well do they pick what to request?  Background Knowledge o Research Motivation o Experimental Setup o First Results o Downward Spiral o Intervention o Before, After 4/26

  5. It’s bad Maximum:5 Mb/s Fair Share: 2.5 Mb/s Optimal: 1.75 Mb/s Used: 235 kb/s What makes this so difficult? 5/26

  6.  Problem Services are similar - not identical  Background Knowledge  Research Motivation Ways to stream HTTP video: o Experimental Setup Web browser vs. PS3 • o First Results o Downward Spiral Single connection vs. many • o Intervention Entire file vs. chunks • o Before, After 6/26

  7. Implementation Details 7/26

  8. Network Parameter Controls NetFPGA rate limiter: 5 MB/s Competing flow: same file, same CDN, simple TCP file download 8/26

  9.  Problem No surprises - they’re terrible  •  Background Knowledge Repeated 76 times over four days •  Research Motivation  Experimental Setup 91% of cases failed predictably • o First Results o Downward Spiral o Intervention o Before, After 9/26

  10. 10/26

  11. Sanity Check? 11/26

  12.  Problem Follow the spiral down  Background Knowledge  Research Motivation Monitor everything:  Experimental Setup TCP throughput  First Results • o Downward Spiral Buffer size • o Intervention Request interval • o Before, After Congestion window • Where do these algorithms go wrong? 12/26

  13. Client Network Behavior 13/26

  14. TCP Congestion Window • Times out in 4s OFF period • Reset to initial value of 10 packets, every time • Single persistent connection • Ramp up from slow start for each segment anyway • No competing flow? No problem 14/26

  15. Completely Squashed 15/26

  16. Rational Behavior 16/26

  17. A More Complete Picture • Playback buffer fills – starts periodic ON-OFF • During OFF period: • Video stream congestion window idle resets • Competing flow is still going, filling the routers buffer • ON period starts: • Very high initial packet loss • Estimate artificially low bandwidth • Lower playback rate 17/26

  18. The “Spiral” Part • ON period starts: • Very high initial packet loss • Estimate artificially low bandwidth • Lower playback rate – which means shorter segments • Each estimate is ever lower than the previous • Spiral down until you can’t play lower quality 18/26

  19. Another Thing - Timing 19/26

  20.  Problem Mimic Service A  Background Knowledge  Research Motivation  Experimental Setup  First Results  Downward Spiral o Intervention o Before, After 20/26

  21. Less Conservative • Service A ~40% • Try out 10% 21/26

  22. Better Filtering • Service A: ten sample moving average • Try: 80 th percentile 22/26

  23. Finally: Bigger Segments 23/26

  24.  Problem  Background Knowledge  Research Motivation  Experimental Setup  First Results  Downward Spiral  Intervention o Before, After 24/26

  25. To Conclude • On the one hand, there are changes to how the client estimates bandwidth which can improve its interplay with TCPs congestion control • A more radical solution: • Don’t attempt to estimate bandwidth at all • Competing goals: highest bitrate, and no underruns • Goal is NOT “keep the buffer full” • Goal is “don’t let the buffer get empty” • Increase the playback bitrate when the buffer is high • Decrease the playback bitrate when the buffer is low • Perfect layer of separation: • TCP responsible for delivering fair share bandwidth • Video player responsible for showing the highest rate it can 25/26

  26. Questions Thank you for listening 26/26

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend