Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 51, Issue 3, pp 535–548 | Cite as

Comparison of Conventional and Cross-Layer Multimedia Transport Schemes for Wireless Networks

  • Syed Ali KhayamEmail author
  • Hayder Radha


Three competing schemes have been proposed for multimedia transport over broadband wireless channels: (a) traditional UDP (Postel, The User Datagram Protocol, 1980 [1]), (b) semi-cross-layer UDP-Lite (The Lightweight User Datagram Protocol, 2004 [2]), and (c) cross-layer header estimation (Khayam et al., IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 9(2):377–385, 2007 [3]; Khayam and Radha, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications 6(11):3946–3954, 2007 [4]). In all these schemes, corrupted and lost packets are recovered using FEC at the application layer. In this paper, we analytically and experimentally compare the performances of these broadband wireless multimedia schemes. First, we derive lower bounds on the excepted FEC redundancy required by ideal cross-layer header estimation, UDP and UDP-Lite over an arbitrary-order Markov wireless channel. We show that under realistic wireless channel conditions, the cross-layer header estimation scheme always requires lesser redundancy than UDP and UDP-Lite. We then propose a practical minimum distance decoding (MDD) header estimation scheme, which is receiver-based, low complexity and highly accurate. Trace-driven multimedia experiments over wireless LANs demonstrate that MDD header estimation requires significantly lesser FEC redundancy and renders better video quality than existing schemes.


Wireless multimedia Cross-layer design UDP-Lite Header estimation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Postel, J. (1980). The User Datagram Protocol. RFC 768, August 1980.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Larzon, L.-A., Degermark, M., Pink, S., Jonsson, L.-E., & Fairhurst, G. (2004). The Lightweight User Datagram Protocol (UDP-Lite). RFC 3828, July 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khayam S. A., Karande S., Ilyas M. U., Radha H. (2007) Header detection to improve multimedia quality over wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 9(2): 377–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Khayam S. A., Radha H. (2007) Maximum-likelihood header estimation: A cross-layer methodology for wireless multimedia. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications 6(11): 3946–3954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Masala, E., Bottero, M., & De Martin, J. C. (2005). MAC-level partial checksum for H.264 video transmission over 802.11 ad hoc wireless networks. In IEEE VTC, Stockholm, Sweden, May 2005, Vol. 5, pp. 2864–2868.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Servetti, A., & De Martin, J. C. (2005). Error tolerant MAC extension for speech communications over 802.11 WLANs. In IEEE VTC, Stockholm, Sweden, May 2005, Vol. 4, pp. 2330–2334.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Singh, A., Konrad, A., & Joseph, A. D. (2001). Performance evaluation of UDP-Lite for cellular video. In ACM NOSSDAV, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zheng H., Boyce J. (2001) An improved UDP protocol for video transmission over Internet-to-wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 3(3): 356–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zorzi M., Rao R. R. (1997) On the statistics of block errors in bursty channels. IEEE Transactions on Communications 45(6): 660–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Konrad A., Zhao B. Y., Joseph A. D., Ludwig R. (2003) A Markov-based channel model algorithm for wireless networks. ACM Wireless Networks 9: 189–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khayam S. A., Radha H., Aviyente S., Deller J. R. Jr. (2007) Markov and multifractal wavelet models for wireless MAC-to-MAC channels. Elsevier Performance Evaluation 64(4): 298–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Willig A., Kubisch M., Hoene C., Wolisz A. (2002) Measurements of a wireless link in an industrial environment using and 802.11-compliant physical layer. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 49(6): 1265–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blahut R. E. (1984) Theory and practice of error control codes. Addison-Wesley, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Draft ITU-T Recommendation and Final Draft International Standard of Joint Video Specification (ITU-T Rec. H.264 | ISO/IEC 14496-10 AVC), Doc. JVT-G050, March 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences (SEECS)National University of Sciences & Technology (NUST)IslamabadPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Electrical & Computer EngineeringMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations