Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Multi-access Edge Computing video analytics of ITU-T P.1203 Quality of Experience for streaming monitoring in dense client cells

Published: 01 April 2022 Publication History

Abstract

5G promises unseen network rates and capacity. Furthermore, 5G ambitions agile networking for specific service traffic catalysing the application and network symbiosis. Nowadays, the video streaming services consume lots of networking assets and produce high dynamics caused by players mobility meaning a challenging traffic for network management. The Quality of Experience (QoE) metric defined by ITU-T P.1203 formulates the playback issues related to widely employed Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH) technologies based on a set of parameters measured at the video player. Monitoring the individual QoE is essential to dynamically provide the best experience to each user in a cell, while video players compete to enhance their individual QoE and cause high network performance dynamics. The edge systems have a perfect position to bring live coordination to dense and dynamic environments, but they are not aware of QoE experienced by each video player. This work proposes a mechanism to assess QoE scores from network dynamics at the cell and manifests of DASH streams without an explicit out of band messaging from video players to edge systems. Hence, this paper implements an edge proxy, independent from video servers and players, to monitor and estimate QoE providing the required information to later decide streaming qualities in a coordinated manner in a dense client cell. Its lightweight computation design provides real-time and distributed processing of local sessions. To check its validity, a WiFi setup has been exercised where the accuracy of the system at the edge is checked by assessing the ITU-T P.1203 QoE of individual players.

References

[1]
Akhshabi S, Anantakrishnan L, Begen AC, Dovrolis C (2012) What happens when HTTP adaptive streaming players compete for bandwidth?. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international workshop on network and operating system support for digital audio and video, pp 9–14.
[2]
Akhshabi S, Anantakrishnan L, Dovrolis C, Begen AC (2013) Server-based traffic shaping for stabilizing oscillating adaptive streaming players. In: Proceeding of the 23rd ACM workshop on network and operating systems support for digital audio and video, pp 19–24.
[3]
De Cock J, Li Z, Manohara M, Aaron A (2016) Complexity-based consistent-quality encoding in the cloud. In: IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), pp 1484–1488.
[4]
Dutta S, Taleb T, Frangoudis PA, Ksentini A (2016) On-the-fly QoE-Aware Transcoding in the Mobile Edge. In: IEEE global communications conference (GLOBECOM), pp 1–6.
[5]
ETSI (2018) ETSI GS MEC 002 version 2.1.1 - Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC): Phase 2: Use Cases and Requirements. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/002/02.01.01_60/gs_MEC002v020101p.pdf Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[6]
ETSI (2018) ETSI TS 122 261 version 15.6.0 - 5G; Service requirements for next generation new services and markets. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/122200_122299/122261/15.06.00_60/ts_122261v150600p.pdf Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[7]
ETSI (2020) ETSI GS MEC 028 version 2.1.1 - Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC); WLAN Information API. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/028/02.01.01_60/gs_MEC028v020101p.pdf Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[8]
Fajardo J, Taboada I, and Liberal I Improving content delivery efficiency through multi-layer mobile edge adaptation IEEE Netw 2015 29 6 40-46
[9]
Ge C, Wang N (2018) Real-time QoE estimation of DASH-based mobile video applications through edge computing. In: IEEE conference on computer communications workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), pp 766–771.
[10]
Ge X, Tu S, Mao G, Wang C, and Han T 5G ultra-dense cellular networks IEEE Wirel Commun 2016 23 1 72-79
[11]
GStreamer: open source multimedia framework. https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/ Accessed 13 December 2020
[12]
Huang W, Zhou Y, Xie X, Wu D, Chen M, and Ngai E Buffer state is enough: Simplifying the design of QoE-Aware HTTP adaptive video streaming IEEE Trans Broadcast 2018 64 2 590-601
[13]
ITU-T Rec. P.1203 Standalone Implementation. https://github.com/itu-p1203/itu-p1203 Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[14]
Juluri P, Tamarapalli V, and Medhi D Measurement of quality of experience of video-on-demand services: a survey IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 2016 18 1 401-418
[15]
Khan K, Goodridge W (2018) What happens when adaptive video streaming players compete in time-varying bandwidth conditions?. International journal of advanced networking and applications, pp 3704–3712.
[16]
Koskimies L, Taleb T, Bagaa M (2017) Qoe estimation-based server benchmarking for virtual video delivery platform. In: IEEE international conference on communications (ICC), pp 1–6.
[17]
Lederer S, Mueller C, Timmerer C, Concolato C, Le Feuvre J, Fliegel K (2013) Distributed DASH dataset. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM multimedia systems conference, pp 131–135.
[18]
Liotou E, Tsolkas D, Passas N (2016) A roadmap on QoE metrics and models. In: International conference on telecommunications (ICT), pp 1–5.
[19]
Mangla T, Halepovic E, Ammar M, Zegura E (2017) MIMIC: Using passive network measurements to estimate HTTP-based adaptive video QoE metrics. In: 2017 network traffic measurement and analysis conference, pp 1–6.
[20]
Mangla T, Halepovic E, Ammar M, Zegura E (2018) emimic: Estimating http-based video qoe metrics from encrypted network traffic. In: 2018 network traffic measurement and analysis conference, pp 1–8.
[21]
Mazhar MH, Shafiq Z (2018) Real-time video quality of experience monitoring for https and quic. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2018-IEEE conference on computer communications:, pp 1331–1339.
[22]
Mozilla MDN web docs, User-Agent. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/User-Agent Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[23]
Mueller C, Lederer S, Grandl R, Timmerer C (2015) Oscillation compensating dynamic adaptive streaming over http. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), pp 1–6.
[24]
Node.js: asynchronous event driven JavaScript runtime. https://nodejs.org/en/ Accessed 13 Dec 2020
[25]
Quadri C, Gaito S, Bruschi R, Davoli F, Rossi GP (2018) A MEC approach to improve QoE of video delivery service in urban spaces. In: IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP), pp 25–32.
[26]
Raake A, Garcia MN, Robitza W, List P, Göring S, Feiten B (2017) A bitstream-based, scalable video-quality model for HTTP adaptive streaming: ITU-T P.1203.1. In: 2017 Ninth international conference on quality of multimedia experience (QoMEX), pp 1–6.
[27]
Recommendation ITU-T P.800.1 (2016) Mean opinion score (MOS) terminology
[28]
Recommendation ITU-T P.1203 (2017) Parametric bitstream-based quality assessment of progressive download and adaptive audiovisual streaming services over reliable transport
[29]
Richardson M, Wallace S (2012) Getting started with raspberry PI. O’Reilly Media Inc
[30]
Robitza W, Göring S, Raake A, Lindegren D, Heikkilä G, Gustafsson J, List P, Feiten B, Wüstenhagen U, Garcia MN, Yamagishi K, Broom S (2018) HTTP Adaptive Streaming QoE Estimation With ITU-t Rec. In: P.1203 – Open Databases and Software, 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference, pp 466–471.
[31]
Younis A, Tran TX, Pompili D (2019) On-Demand Video-Streaming Quality of experience maximization in mobile edge computing. IEEE international symposium on ”A world of wireless, mobile and multimedia networks, (WoWMoM), pp 1–9.
[32]
Yu H, Zheng D, Zhao BJ, and Zheng W Understanding user behavior in large-scale video-on-demand systems ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 2006 40 4 333-344
[33]
Zhang X, Wang J (2018) Joint heterogeneous statistical-QoS/QoE provisionings for edge-computing based WiFi offloading over 5G mobile wireless networks. In: Annual conference on information sciences and systems (CISS), pp 1–6.

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Multimedia Tools and Applications
Multimedia Tools and Applications  Volume 81, Issue 9
Apr 2022
1278 pages

Publisher

Kluwer Academic Publishers

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 April 2022
Accepted: 30 January 2022
Revision received: 25 March 2021
Received: 28 August 2020

Author Tags

  1. 5G
  2. MEC
  3. MOS
  4. MPEG-DASH
  5. QoE

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • Gipuzkoa’s research and innovation programme
  • Red Cervera program, Spanish government’s Centre for the Development of Industrial Technology

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media