3D Research

, 9:30 | Cite as

Measuring Effect of Packet Reordering on Quality of Experience (QoE) in Video Streaming

  • Asif Ali Laghari
  • Hui HeEmail author
  • Muhammad Ibrahim Channa
3DR Express
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Multimedia tools


Video streaming is an important part of the Internet and it is widely used for IPTV, video conferencing and E-learning. The quality of experience (QoE) of users about the video contents is important for service providers to improve services and provide quality of service to end users. The video quality is affected by packet reordering, delay and loss in the network, which degrades the QoE of end users. In this paper, we conducted several experiments on video streaming creating artificial packet reorder to measure user stratification level of video quality as well as acceptable network level for end users. We used NetEm tool for creating artificial packet reorder in video streaming, recording and playing videos for participants for perception, and investigated the QoE of different packet reorder percentage. From our experiments, we found that QoE of users is decreased when video quality is reordered due to network traffic. This work will help content providers to provide QoE to users based on service level agreements.

Graphical Abstract


Quality of experience (QoE) Quality of service (QoS) Packet reordering Video streaming Perception 



The work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Grant No. 2017YB0801801, the National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 61472108. Professor Hui He is corresponding author.


  1. 1.
    Tinta, S. P., Mohr, A. E., & Wong, J. L. (2009). Characterizing end-to-end packet reordering with UDP traffic. In IEEE symposium on computers and communications, 2009. ISCC 2009 (pp. 321–324).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Joshi, R., Mandava, M., & Saraph, G. P. (2008). End-to-end quality of service (QoS) over internet. IETE Technical Review, 25(4), 216–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhou, X., & Van Mieghem, P. (2004). Reordering of IP packets in Internet. In International workshop on passive and active network measurement (pp. 237–246).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asano, A., Nishiyama, H., & Kato, N. (2010). The effect of packet reordering and encrypted traffic on streaming content leakage detection. In 2010 Proceedings of 19th international conference on computer communications and networks.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Usman, M. A., Shin, S. Y., Shahid, M., & Lövström, B. (2017). A no reference video quality metric based on jerkiness estimation focusing on multiple frame freezing in video streaming. IETE Technical Review, 34(3), 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Exarchakos, G., Druda, L., Menkovski, V., & Liotta, A. (2015). Network analysis on Skype end-to-end video quality. International Journal of Pervasive Computing and Communications, 11(1), 17–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M., & Khan, A., (2016). Assessing effect of cloud distance on end user’s quality of experience (QoE). In 2016 2nd IEEE international conference on computer and communications (ICCC) (pp. 500–505).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Laghari, A. A., He, H., Ibrahim, M., & Shaikh, S. (2017). Automatic network policy change on the basis of quality of experience (QoE). Procedia Computer Science, 107, 657–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laghari, A. A., Sadhayo, I. H., & Channa, M. I. (2015). Enhanced autonomic networking management architecture (Enama). Engineering, Science & Technology, 14(1), 9–13.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Le Callet, P., Möller, S., & Perkis, A., (2013). Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience (2012). In European network on quality of experience in multimedia systems and services (COST Action IC 1003).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laghari, A. A., Laghari, K. U. R., Channa, M. I., & Falk, T. H., (2012). QON: Quality of experience (QoE) framework for network services. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on software technology and engineering (ICSTE’12).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Charonyktakis, P., Plakia, M., Tsamardinos, I., & Papadopouli, M. (2016). On user-centric modular QoE prediction for VoIP based on machine-learning algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 15(6), 1443–1456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Laghari, A. A., Channa, M. I., Laghari, K. R., Aman, M., & Memon, M. (2013). EQOM: enhanced quality of experience (QoE) framework for multimedia services. UACEE International Journal of Computer Science and Its Applications, 3(1), 85–89.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Timmerer, C., Maiero, M., & Rainer, B. (2016). Which adaptation logic? An objective and subjective performance evaluation of http-based adaptive media streaming systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.00341.
  16. 16.
    Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M., & Khan, A., (2017). Impact of storage of mobile on quality of experience (QoE) at user level accessing cloud. In 2017 IEEE 9th international conference on communication software and networks (ICCSN) (pp. 1402–1409).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    NetEm. Accessed Nov 5, 2016, from
  18. 18.
    Laghari, A. A., Dilshad, A., & Memon, M. S. (2012). Merging quality of experience with autonomic networks. Sindh University Research Journal (SURJ) (Science Series), 44(2AB), 69–74.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, L., & Gelenbe, E. (2015). Demonstrating voice over an autonomic network. In IEEE international conference on autonomic computing (ICAC) (pp. 139–140).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yohannes, D., & Mali, D. (2016). Effect of delay, packet loss, packet duplication and packet reordering on voice communication quality over WLan. Technia, 8(2), 1071.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laghari, K. R., Issa, O., Speranza, F., & Falk, T. H. (2012). Quality-of-experience perception for video streaming services: Preliminary subjective and objective results. In Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC) (pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hemminger, S. (2005). Network emulation with NetEm. In Linux conf au (pp. 18–23).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    VLC player. Accessed 24 March 2018.
  24. 24.
    BT, R.I.R. (2002). Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ITU-T RECOMMENDATION, P. (1999). Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 3D Research Center, Kwangwoon University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asif Ali Laghari
    • 1
  • Hui He
    • 1
    Email author
  • Muhammad Ibrahim Channa
    • 2
  1. 1.Harbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  2. 2.Information Technology DepartmentQuaid-e-Awam University of Science and TechnologyNawabshahPakistan

Personalised recommendations