Computing

, Volume 94, Issue 8–10, pp 621–647 | Cite as

Distributed optimization of P2P live streaming overlays

  • Amir H. Payberah
  • Jim Dowling
  • Fatemeh Rahimain
  • Seif Haridi
Article

Abstract

Peer-to-peer live media streaming over the Internet is becoming increasingly more popular, though it is still a challenging problem. Nodes should receive the stream with respect to intrinsic timing constraints, while the overlay should adapt to the changes in the network and the nodes should be incentivized to contribute their resources. In this work, we meet these contradictory requirements simultaneously, by introducing a distributed market model to build an efficient overlay for live media streaming. Using our market model, we construct two different overlay topologies, tree-based and mesh-based, which are the two dominant approaches to the media distribution. First, we build an approximately minimal height multiple-tree data dissemination overlay, called Sepidar. Next, we extend our model, in GLive, to make it more robust in dynamic networks by replacing the tree structure with a mesh. We show in simulation that the mesh-based overlay outperforms the multiple-tree overlay. We compare the performance of our two systems with the state-of-the-art NewCoolstreaming, and observe that they provide better playback continuity and lower playback latency than that of NewCoolstreaming under a variety of experimental scenarios. Although our distributed market model can be run against a random sample of nodes, we improve its convergence time by executing it against a sample of nodes taken from the Gradient overlay. The evaluations show that the streaming overlays converge faster when our market model works on top of the Gradient overlay.

Keywords

P2P live streaming The Gradient overlay Distributed algorithms Market-based algorithms Auction algorithm 

Mathematics Subject Classification

68M14 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arad C, Dowling J, Haridi S (2009) Developing, simulating, and deploying peer-to-peer systems using the kompics component model. In: Proceedings of the 4th ICST international conference on communication system software and middleware (COMSWARE’09), pp 1–9Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asaduzzaman S, Qiao Y, Bochmann G (2008) CliqueStream: an efficient and fault-resilient live streaming network on a clustered peer-to-peer overlay. In: Proceedings of the 8th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P’08), pp 269–278Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banerjee S, Bhattacharjee B, Kommareddy C (2002) Scalable application layer multicast. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on applications, Technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication (SIGCOMM’02), pp 205–217Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertsekas D (1992) Auction algorithms for network flow problems: a tutorial introduction. Comput Optim Appl 1: 7–66MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bertsekas D (1998) Network optimization: continuous and discrete models. Athena Scientific, BelmontMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertsekas DP, Castanon DA (1989) The auction algorithm for the transportation problem. Ann Oper Res 20(1): 67–96MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bertsekas DP (1988) The auction algorithm: a distributed relaxation method for the assignment problem. Ann Oper Res 14(1): 105–123MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biskupski B, Schiely M, Felber P, Meier R (2008) Tree-based analysis of mesh overlays for peer-to-peer streaming. In: Proceedings of the 8th IFIP international conference on distributed applications and interoperable systems (DAIS’08), pp 126–139Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlsson N, Eager DL (2007) Peer-assisted on-demand streaming of stored media using bittorrent-like protocols. In: Proceedings of the 6th IFIP international conference on ad hoc and sensor networks, wireless networks, next generation internet (NETWORKING’07), pp 570–581Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Castro M, Druschel P, Kermarrec AM, Nandi A, Rowstron A, Singh A (2003) Splitstream: high-bandwidth multicast in cooperative environments. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’03), pp 298–313Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohen B (2003) Incentives build robustness in bittorrent. In: Proceeding of the 1st workshop on economics of peer-to-peer systems (P2PEcon’03), pp 68–72Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dowling J, Payberah AH (2012) Shuffling with a croupier: Nat-aware peer-sampling. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’12)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fortuna R, Leonardi E, Mellia M, Meo M, Traverso S (2010) QoE in pull based P2P-TV systems: overlay topology design tradeoffs. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P’10), pp 256–265Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frey D, Guerraoui R, Kermarrec A, Monod M (2010) Boosting gossip for live streaming. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P’10), pp 296–305Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gummadi K, Saroiu S, Gribble S (2002) King: Estimating latency between arbitrary internet end hosts. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on Internet measurment (SIGCOMM’02), pp 5–18Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jarvis SA, Tan G, Spooner DP, Nudd GR (2006) Constructing reliable and efficient overlays for p2p live media streaming. J Simul Process Model 7(2): 54–62Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jiang X, Dong Y, Xu D, Bhargava B (2003) Gnustream: a p2p media streaming system prototype. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME’03), pp 325–328Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kuhn HW (1955) The Hungarian method for the assignment problem. Nav Res Logist Q 2(1–2): 83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li B, Qu Y, Keung Y, Xie S, Lin C, Liu J, Zhang X (2008) Inside the new coolstreaming: principles, measurements and performance implications. In: Proceedings of the 27th IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’08), pp 1031–1039Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li Z, Mahanti A (2006) A progressive flow auction approach for low-cost on-demand p2p media streaming. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ICST international conference on quality of service in heterogeneous wired/wireless networks (QShine’06)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Locher T, Meier R, Schmid S, Wattenhofer R (2007) Push-to-pull peer-to-peer live streaming. In: Proceedings of DISC 2007; 21st international symposium on distributed computing, pp 388–402Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lu Y, Fallica B, Kuipers F, Kooij R, Mieghem PV (2009) Assessing the quality of experience of sopcast. J Internet Protoc Technol 4(1): 11–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Magharei N, Rejaie R (2007) Prime: Peer-to-peer receiver-driven mesh-based streaming. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE Conference On Computer Communications (INFOCOM’07), pp 1415–1423Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Magharei N, Rejaie R, Guo Y (2007) Mesh or multiple-tree: a comparative study of live p2p streaming approaches. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’07), pp 1424–1432Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Meulpolder M, Pouwelse JA, Epema DHJ, Sips HJ (2009) Bartercast: a practical approach to prevent lazy freeriding in p2p networks. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE international symposium on parallel and distributed processing (IPDPS’09), pp 1–8Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mol J, Pouwelse J, Meulpolder M, Epema D, Sips H (2008) Give-to-get: Free-riding-resilient video-on-demand in p2p systems. In: Proceedings of the 15th SPIE/ACM Multimedia Computing and Networking (MMCN’08)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mol JJD, Epema DHJ, Sips HJ (2006) The orchard algorithm: P2p multicasting without free-riding. In: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P’06), pp 275–282Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Padmanabhan VN, Wang HJ, Chou PA, Sripanidkulchai K (2002) Distributing streaming media content using cooperative networking. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM international workshop on network and operating systems support for digital audio and video (NOSSDAV’02), pp 177–186Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pai V, Kumar K, Tamilmani K, Sambamurthy V, Mohr AE, Mohr EE (2005) Chainsaw: eliminating trees from overlay multicast. In: Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on peer-to-peer systems (IPTPS’05), pp 127–140Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Park C, An W, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2010) Distributed auction algorithms for the assignment problem with partial information. In: Proceedings of the 15th international command and control research and technology symposium (ICCRTS’10)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Park K, Pack S, Kwon T (2008) Climber: an incentive-based resilient peer-to-peer system for live streaming services. In: Proceedings of the 7th international Workshop on peer-to-peer systems (IPTPS’08), p 10Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Payberah AH, Dowling J, Haridi S (2011) Glive: the gradient overlay as a market maker for mesh-based p2p live streaming. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international symposium on parallel and distributed computing (ISPDC’11), pp 153–162Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Payberah AH, Dowling J, Haridi S (2011) Gozar: NAT-friendly peer sampling with one-hop distributed nat traversal. In: Proceedings of the 11th IFIP international conference on Distributed applications and interoperable systems (DAIS’11), pp 1–14Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Payberah AH, Dowling J, Rahimian F, Haridi S (2010) gradientv: Market-based p2p live media streaming on the gradient overlay. In: Proceedings of the 10th IFIP international conference on distributed applications and interoperable systems (DAIS’10), pp 212–225Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Payberah AH, Dowling J, Rahimian F, Haridi S (2010) Sepidar: incentivized market-based p2p live-streaming on the gradient overlay network. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on multimedia (ISM’10), pp 1–8Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pianese F, Keller J, Biersack EW (2006) Pulse, a flexible p2p live streaming system. In: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’06), pp 1–6Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sacha J, Biskupski B, Dahlem D, Cunningham R, Meier R, Dowling J, Haahr M (2010) Decentralising a service-oriented architecture. Peer-to-Peer Netw Appl 3(4): 323–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sacha J, Dowling J, Cunningham R, Meier R (2006) Discovery of stable peers in a self-organising peer-to-peer gradient topology. In: Proceedings of the 6th IFIP international conference distributed applications and interoperable systems (DAIS’06), pp 70–83Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tan G, Jarvis SA (2008) A payment-based incentive and service differentiation scheme for peer-to-peer streaming broadcast. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 19(7): 940–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Terelius H, Shi G, Dowling J, Payberah AH, Gattami A, Johansson KH (2011) Converging an overlay network to a gradient topology. In: Proceedings of the 50th IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC’11)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tran DA, Hua KA, Do TT (2003) Zigzag: an efficient peer-to-peer scheme for media streaming. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’03), pp 1283–1292Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vasconcelos CN, Rosenhahn B (2009) Bipartite graph matching computation on GPU. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on energy minimization methods in computer vision and pattern recognition (EMMCVPR’09), pp 42–55Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Venkataraman V, Yoshida K, Francis P (2006) Chunkyspread: heterogeneous unstructured tree-based peer-to-peer multicast. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE international conference on network protocols (ICNP’06), pp 2–11Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vlavianos A, Iliofotou M, Faloutsos M (2006) Bitos: enhancing bittorrent for supporting streaming applications. In: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’06), pp 1–6Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Voulgaris S, Gavidia D, van Steen M (2005) CYCLON: inexpensive membership management for unstructured P2P overlays. J Netw Syst Manag 13(2): 197–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang F, Xiong Y, Liu J (2007) mtreebone: A hybrid tree/mesh overlay for application-layer live video multicast. In: Proceedings of the 27th IEEE international conference on distributed computing systems (ICDCS’07), p 49Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    West DB (2000) Introduction to graph theory, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xie S, Li B, Keung GY, Zhang X (2007) Coolstreaming: design, theory and practice. IEEE Trans Multimed 9(8): 1661–1671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yiu WPK, Jin X, Chan SHG (2007) Challenges and approaches in large-scale p2p media streaming. IEEE Multimed 14(2): 50–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zavlanos MM, Spesivtsev L, Pappas GJ (2008) A distributed auction algorithm for the assignment problem. In: Proceedings of the 47th IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC’08), pp 1212–1217Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhang X, Liu J, Li B, Shing Peter Yum T (2005) Coolstreaming/donet: a data-driven overlay network for peer-to-peer live media streaming. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE conference on computer communications (INFOCOM’05), pp 2102–2111Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhao BQ, Lui JCS, Chiu DM (2009) Exploring the optimal chunk selection policy for data-driven p2p streaming systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P’09), pp 271–280Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amir H. Payberah
    • 1
  • Jim Dowling
    • 1
  • Fatemeh Rahimain
    • 1
  • Seif Haridi
    • 1
  1. 1.SICSKistaSweden

Personalised recommendations