Journal of Network and Systems Management

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 280–308 | Cite as

Software-Defined Multicast for Over-the-Top and Overlay-based Live Streaming in ISP Networks

  • Julius Rückert
  • Jeremias Blendin
  • David Hausheer


The increasing amount of over-the-top (OTT) live streams and the lack of global network layer multicast support poses challenges for a scalable and efficient streaming over the Internet. Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) help by delivering the streams to the edge of almost every Internet Service Provider (ISP) network of the world but usually also end there. From there on, the streams are to be delivered to the clients using IP unicast, although an IP multicast functionality would be desirable to reduce the load on CDN nodes, transit links, and the ISP infrastructure. IP multicast is usually not available due to missing control and management features of the protocol. Alternatively, Peer-to-Peer (P2P) mechanisms can be applied to extend the overlay multicast functionality of the CDN towards the clients. Unfortunately, P2P only improves the situation for the CDN but makes it more challenging for the ISP as even more unicast flows are generated between clients inside and outside the ISP network. To tackle this problem, a Software-Defined Networking-based cross-layer approach, called Software-Defined Multicast (SDM), is proposed in this paper, enabling ISPs to offer network layer multicast support for OTT and overlay-based live streaming as a service. SDM is specifically tailored towards the needs of P2P-based video stream delivery originating from outside the ISP network and can easily be integrated with existing streaming systems. Prototypical evaluations show significantly improved network layer transmission efficiencies when compared to other overlay streaming mechanisms, down to a level as low as for IP multicast, at linearly bounded costs.


Software-Defined Networking OpenFlow Peer-to-Peer Content Delivery Multimedia Delivery 



This work has been funded in parts by the European Union (FP7/ #317846, SmartenIT and FP7/#318398, eCOUSIN) and the DFG as part of the CRC 1053 MAKI.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Sandvine: Fall 2012 global internet phenomena report (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Labovitz, C., Iekel-Johnson, S., McPherson, D., Oberheide, J., Jahanian, F.: Internet inter-domain traffic. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ericsson: Ericsson ConsumerLab: TV and video—an analysis of evolving consumer habits. Insight summary report (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diot, C., Levine, B.N., Lyles, B., Kassem, H., Balensiefen, D.: Deployment issues for the IP multicast service and architecture. IEEE Netw. 14(1), 78–88 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nygren, E., Sitaraman, R.K., Sun, J.: The Akamai network: a platform for high-performance internet applications. ACM SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 44(3), 2–19 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Krishnan, R., Madhyastha, H., Srinivasan, S., Jain, S., Krishnamurthy, A., Anderson, T., Gao, J.: Moving beyond end-to-end path information to optimize CDN performance. In: ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hasslinger, G., Hartleb, F.: Content delivery and caching from a network providers perspective. Comput. Netw. 55(18), 3991–4006 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, Y., Guo, Y., Liang, C.: A survey on peer-to-peer video streaming systems. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 1(1), 18–28 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, X., Hassanein, H.: A survey of peer-to-peer live video streaming schemes—an algorithmic perspective. Comput. Netw. 56(15), 3548–3579 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McKeown, N., Anderson, T., Balakrishnan, H., Parulkar, G., Peterson, L., Rexford, J., Shenker, S., Turner, J.: OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(2), 69–74 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoelzle, U.: Openflow@Google. Presentation at open networking summit. (2012)
  13. 13.
    Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Venkata, S., Wanderer, J., Zhou, J., Zhu, M., Zolla, J., Hölzle, U., Stuart, S., Vahdat, A.: B4: experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Papafili, I., Soursos, S., Stamoulis, G.D.: Improvement of BitTorrent performance and inter-domain traffic by inserting ISP-owned peers. In: International Workshop on Internet Charging and Qos Technologies (ICQT) (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marcondes, C., Santos, T., Godoy, A., Viel, C., Teixeira, C.: CastFlow: clean-slate multicast approach using in-advance path processing in programmable networks. In: IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC) (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kotani, D., Suzuki, K., Shimonishi, H.: A design and implementation of OpenFlow controller handling IP multicast with fast tree switching. In: IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT) (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kind, M., Westphal, F.J., Gladisch, A., Topp, S.: SplitArchitecture: applying the software defined networking concept to carrier networks. In: IEEE World Telecommunications Congress (WTC) (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    John, W., Devlic, A., Ding, Z., Kern, A., Köpsel, A., Nordell, V., Sharma, S., Sköldström, P., Staessens, D., Takács, A., Topp, S., Westphal, F.J., Woesner, H., Gladisch, A.: Split architecture for large scale wide area networks. Public deliverable D3.3. (2012)
  19. 19.
    Seedorf, J., Kiesel, S., Stiemerling, M.: Traffic localization for P2P-applications: the ALTO approach. In: IEEE P2P (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dán, G., Hossfeld, T., Oechsner, S., Cholda, P., Stankiewicz, R., Papafili, I., Stamoulis, G.: Interaction patterns between P2P content distribution systems and ISPs. IEEE Commun. Mag. 49(5), 222–230 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stoica, I., Ng, T.S.E., Zhang, H.: REUNITE: a recursive unicast approach to multicast. In: IEEE INFOCOM (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Imai, Y., Feldman, N., Boivie, R., Livens, W., Ooms, D.: Explicit multicast (Xcast) concepts and options. Internet Engineering Task Force. (2007)
  23. 23.
    Jokela, P., Zahemszky, A., Rothenberg, C.E., Arianfar, S., Nikander, P.: LIPSIN: line speed publish/subscribe inter-networking. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blendin, J.: Cross-layer optimization of peer-to-peer video streaming in OpenFlow-based ISP networks. Diploma Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, (2013)
  25. 25.
    Jin, X., Tu, W., Chan, S.H.G.: Challenges and advances in using IP multicast for overlay data delivery. IEEE Commun. Mag. 47(6), 157–163 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wen, C.C., Chiu, C.J., Wu, C.S., Su, H.K., Chu, Y.S.: An integrated two-tier multicast-agent architecture for All-IP multicast transport services. In: IEEE International Conference on Broadband and Wireless Computing, Communication and Applications (BWCCA) (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lee, S., Sahu, S.: Optimized hybrid overlay design for real time broadcasting. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN) (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gladisch, A., Westphal, F.J.: Directions of next generation transport network development. In: Optical Fiber Communication Conference and Exposition and the National Fiber Optic Engineers Conference (OFC/NFOEC) (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hasslinger, G.: Improving peer-to-peer transport paths for content distribution. In: Shen, X., Yu, H., Buford, J., Akon, M. (eds.) Handbook of peer-to-peer networking, pp. 1277–1291. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stordahl, K.: Long-term penetration and traffic forecasts for the Western European fixed broadband market. In: European Regional Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS) (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
    Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., Callon, R.: Multiprotocol label switching architecture. RFC 3031, IETF. (2001)
  33. 33.
    Shenker, S.: Software-defined networking at the crossroads. Presentation in Stanford University Computer Systems Colloquium, (2013)
  34. 34.
    Pagiamtzis, K., Sheikholeslami, A.: Content-addressable memory (CAM) circuits and architectures: a tutorial and survey. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 41(3), 712–727 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Luo, L., Xie, G., Uhlig, S., Mathy, L., Salamatian, K., Xie, Y.: Towards TCAM-based scalable virtual routers. In: ACM CoNEXT (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    Alimi, R., Penno, R., Yang, Y.: ALTO protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force. (2013)
  38. 38.
    Open Networking Foundation: OpenFlow Switch Specification 1.0.0. (2009)
  39. 39.
    Open Networking Foundation: OpenFlow Switch Specification 1.1.0. (2011)
  40. 40.
    Open Networking Foundation: Software-Defined Networking: The New Norm for Networks. (2012)
  41. 41.
    Srisuresh, P., Egevang, K.: Traditional IP network address translator (Traditional NAT). RFC 3022, IETF. (2001)
  42. 42.
    Düser, M., Gladisch, A.: Evaluation of next generation network architectures and further steps for a clean slate networking approach. Presentation at ITG EuroView, (2006)
  43. 43.
    Padmanabhan, V.N., Wang, H.J., Chou, P.A., et al.: Distributing streaming media content using cooperative networking. In: ACM NOSSDAV (2002)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lantz, B., Heller, B., McKeown, N.: A network in a laptop. In: ACM HotNets Workshop (2010)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pettit, J., Gross, J., Pfaff, B., Casado, M., Crosby, S.: Virtual switching in an era of advanced edges. In: Workshop on Data Center—Converged and Virtual Ethernet Switching (DC-CAVES) (2010)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rückert, J., Blendin, J., Hausheer, D.: RASP: using OpenFlow to push overlay streams into the underlay (Demo Paper). In: IEEE P2P (2013)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jain, R.: The art of computer systems performance analysis. Wiley, Hoboken (1991)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julius Rückert
    • 1
  • Jeremias Blendin
    • 1
  • David Hausheer
    • 1
  1. 1.Peer-to-Peer Systems Engineering LabTechnische Universität DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations