Measuring YouTube from Dual-Stacked Hosts

  • Saba AhsanEmail author
  • Vaibhav Bajpai
  • Jörg Ott
  • Jürgen Schönwälder
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8995)


There is rapid growth in the number of IPv6 users and IPv6 compliant services on the Internet. However, few measurement studies exist about the quality of user experience on IPv6 in comparison to IPv4 for dual-stacked hosts. We present results from a measurement trial consisting of 21 active measurement probes deployed across Europe and Japan connected behind dual-stacked networks, representing 19 different Autonomous System (AS)s. The trial ran for 20 days in September, 2014 and conducted two types of measurements: (a) YouTube performance tests and (b) Speed tests to nearest dual-stacked Measurement Lab (M-Lab) server, both over IPv4 and IPv6. Our results show that a disparity exists in the achievable throughput as indicated by speed tests. We also witness disparity in content delivery servers used for YouTube media for some networks, resulting in degradation of experience over a specific address family.


Transmission Control Protocol Video Stream Speed Test Domain Name System Achievable Throughput 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) grant no. 317647 (Leone). We would like to thank all the volunteers who hosted a SamKnows probe for us. We would also like to thank Sam Crawford, Jamie Mason and Cristian Morales Vega (SamKnows) for providing us technical support on the SamKnows infrastructure. We also would like to thank Steffie Jacob Eravuchira (Jacobs University Bremen) for reviewing the manuscripts.


  1. 1.
    Adhikari, V.K., Jain, S., Zhang, Z.L.: Youtube traffic dynamics and its interplay with a tier-1 ISP: an ISP perspective. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, IMC ’10. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adhikari, V., Jain, S., Chen, Y., Zhang, Z.L.: Vivisecting youtube: an active measurement study. In: 2012 Proceedings IEEE, INFOCOM (March 2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cha, M., Kwak, H., Rodriguez, P., Ahn, Y.Y., Moon, S.: I tube, you tube, everybody tubes: analyzing the world’s largest user generated content video system. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, IMC ’07, pp. 1–14. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dimopoulos, G., Barlet-Ros, P., Sanjuas-Cuxart, J.: Analysis of youtube user experience from passive measurements. In: 2013 9th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM), pp. 260–267 (October 2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Finamore, A., Mellia, M., Munafò, M.M., Torres, R., Rao, S.G.: Youtube everywhere: impact of device and infrastructure synergies on user experience. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, IMC ’11, pp. 345–360. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gill, P., Arlitt, M., Li, Z., Mahanti, A.: Youtube traffic characterization: a view from the edge. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, IMC ’07, pp. 15–28. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Juluri, P., Plissonneau, L., Medhi, D.: Pytomo: A tool for analyzing playback quality of youtube videos. In: 2011 Teletraffic Congress (ITC) (September 2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Juluri, P., Plissonneau, L., Zeng, Y., Medhi, D.: Viewing youtube from a metropolitan area: what do users accessing from residential isps experience? In: IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM) (May 2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nam, H., Kim, K.H., Calin, D., Schulzrinne, H.: Youslow: a performance analysis tool for adaptive bitrate video streaming. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on SIGCOMM, pp. 111–112. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stockhammer, T.: Dynamic adaptive streaming over http: – standards and design principles. In: Proceedings of the Second Annual ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems, MMSys ’11, pp. 133–144. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sundaresan, S., de Donato, W., Feamster, N., Teixeira, R., Crawford, S., Pescapè, A.: Broadband internet performance: a view from the gateway. In: SIGCOMM ’11. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., Chown, T.: Default address selection for internet protocol version 6 (IPv6). RFC 6724 (Proposed Standard), Internet Engineering Task Force (September 2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wing, D., Yourtchenko, A.: Happy eyeballs: success with dual-stack hosts. RFC 6555 (Proposed Standard), Internet Engineering Task Force (April 2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saba Ahsan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vaibhav Bajpai
    • 2
  • Jörg Ott
    • 1
  • Jürgen Schönwälder
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Electrical EngineeringAalto UniversityEspooFinland
  2. 2.Computer ScienceJacobs University BremenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations