skip to main content
research-article

Towards cinematic internet video-on-demand

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 April 2008Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Video-on-demand (VoD) is increasingly popular with Internet users. It gives users greater choice and more control than live streaming or file downloading. Systems such as MSN Video and YouTube deliver content at low bitrates. This may suit short clips, but great films and 5-minute bloopers are as different as symphonies and jingles. For cinema, poor quality and high jitter are less acceptable. Combining user control with high bitrate is compelling, but technically challenging.

VoD is expensive due to the load it places on video source servers. Many researchers have proposed using peer-to-peer (P2P) techniques to shift load from sources to peers (peer-assistance), yet none have implemented and deployed a system with the first purpose of openly and systematically evaluating this approach. To fill this void, we have built and deployed GridCast1. GridCast doubles the bitrates of current popular internet VoD systems, provides a full set of VCR2 operations, and employs peer-assistance to improve scalability and continuity. GridCast has been live on CERNET3 since May of 2006. In peak months, GridCast has served videos to approximately 23,000 users. From the beginning, we have gathered information to understand GridCast and improve its algorithms.

This paper introduces and evaluates GridCast. In May of 2007, we deployed multivideo caching, a major change to the caching algorithms. This paper analyzes scalability and continuity before and after this change. Our results contain several surprises and underline the importance of deployment to validate simulation results. We discuss what improvements can be developed beyond multivideo caching.

References

  1. S. Annapureddy, S. Guha, and C. Gkantsidis. Is High-Quality VoD Feasible Using P2P Swarming? In Proc. of WWW, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. CERNET. China Education and Research Network Annual Report, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. CNNIC. The 20th CNNIC Statistical Survey Report on the Internet Development in China, July 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. B. Cohen. Incentives Build Robustness in BitTorrent. In P2PEcon, June 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. L. Cui, B. Li, and K. Nahrstedt. oStream: Asynchronous Streaming Multicast in Application-layer Overlay Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Aread in Communications, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. K. P. Gummadi, R. J. Dunn, and S. S. et. al. Measurement, Modeling, and Analysis of a Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Workload. In Proc. of SOSP, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Y. Guo, K. Suh, J. Kurose, and D. Towsley. P2Cast: Peer-to-peer Patching Scheme for VoD Service. In Proc. of WWW, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Y. J. Hall, P. Piemonte, and M. Weyant. Joost: A Measurement Study. Technical report, School of Computer Science, Carnegie-Mellon University, May 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. M. Handley, V. Jacobson, and C. Perkins. SDP: Session Description Protocol. RFC 4566, July 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Huang, J. Li, and K. W. Ross. Can Internet Video-on-Demand be Profitable. In Proc. of SIGCOMM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. X. Liao, H. Jin, Y. Liu, M. Ni, and D. Deng. AnySee: Peer-to-Peer Live Streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. H. Schulzrinne, S. Casner, R. Frederick, and V. Jacobson. RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-time Applications. RFC 3550 (Standard), July 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. H. Schulzrinne, A. Rao, and R. Lanphier. Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP). RFC 2326 (Proposed Standard), Apr. 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. K. Sripanidkulchai, B. Maggs, and H. Zhang. An Analysis of Live Streaming Workloads on the Internet. In Proc. of IMC, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Y.-W. Sung, M. Bishop, and S. Rao. Enabling Contribution Awareness in an Overlay Broadcasting System. In Proc. of SIGCOMM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. Tai, H. A. Kien, and T. Mounir. P2VoD: Providing Fault Tolerant Video-on-Demand Streaming in Peer-to-Peer Environment. In Proc. of ICC 2004, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. D. Wang and J. Liu. Peer-to-Peer Asynchronous Video Streaming using Skip List. In Proc. of ICME, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. X. Zhang, J. Liu, B. Li, and Y. S. P. Yum. CoolStreaming/DONet: A Data-driven Overlay Network for Peer-to-peer Live Media Streaming. In Proc. of INFOCOM, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards cinematic internet video-on-demand

      Recommendations

      Reviews

      Dana Petcu

      Cheng et al. describe and discuss GridCast, a video-on-demand system, online since 2006. This system employs peer assistance to improve scalability and continuity. This approach allows GridCast to improve the bit rates, compared with the most popular video-on-demand systems. Special attention is given to scalability and continuity issues arising from the implementation of a multi-video caching technique, one year after the system launch. The experimental results show that the multi-video caching implementation improves both scalability and continuity over single-video caching. I recommend this paper to specialists in peer-to-peer, video-on-demand, or caching techniques. The peer management description is particularly useful, considering that applying peer-to-peer technology to video-on-demand is not yet done on a large scale. This well-described model of a peer-assisted video-on-demand system can be the foundation of new implementations of similar systems. Online Computing Reviews Service

      Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

      Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review
        ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review  Volume 42, Issue 4
        EuroSys '08
        May 2008
        321 pages
        ISSN:0163-5980
        DOI:10.1145/1357010
        Issue’s Table of Contents
        • cover image ACM Conferences
          Eurosys '08: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2008
          April 2008
          346 pages
          ISBN:9781605580135
          DOI:10.1145/1352592

        Copyright © 2008 ACM

        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]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 1 April 2008

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader