The Flow Control of Audio Data Using Distributed Terminal Mixing in Multi-point Communication

  • Young-Mi Kim
  • Dae-Joon Hwang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4027)


This paper describes an efficient audio flow control method in the point of quantitative performance using audio-mixing, compared to existing P2P(Peer To Peer) method. In comparison with existing P2P method, using central mixing and distributed terminal mixing method, we achieved advance at the point of global network usage and each terminal’s CPU load, and additionally we expect more session, more terminal can be served by same amount of network bandwidth and computers. By using P2P method in audio communication, speaker and listener must connect to each other. So it has the critical defect that as the participants grows more and more, the network bandwidth usage, each terminal’s CPU load will grows rapidly. So the number of participants in same session will be extremely restricted. In comparison with P2P method, the central mixing method has the great advantage at the points of network usage and terminals CPU load. Regardless of the number of speakers and listeners, all the participants can speak and listen with all other participants by using just one stream’s amount of data size and CPU load. But all the network usages and CPU loads of "Audio decompression->Buffering->Mixing->Audio Compression" are concentrated on central server. So the number of sessions and terminals can be participated in one server will be highly restricted. This study solves the problems of server’s CPU load and network load by using the distributed terminal mixing method.


Network Bandwidth Network Load Network Usage Audio Data Relay Server 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dering, S.E.: Host Extensions for IP Mlticasting. RFC 1112, Stanford University (August 1989)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oram, A.: Peer-To-Peer. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee, S.G.: The Study On RMTL(Reliable Multipoint Transport Layer) in IP-multicasting environment. In: SungKyunKwan Uni. (October 1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    So, Y.S., Choi, C.Y.: The Multi-source media streaming capable of distribution the contents in P2P network. Korea Information Communication Society (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kawai, T., Akiyama, J., Okada, M.: Point-to-Multipoint Communication Protocol PTMP and Evaluation of Its Performance (January 1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim, H.R., Song, K.S., Jeon, J.S.: Implementation of Multicast protocl and management of resource for the multi-point multimedia. Korea Industrial Engineering Society (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Simpson, W.: The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) for the Transmission of Multi-protocol Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links, RFC 1331 (May 1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., Jacobson, V.: RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications. RFC 1889, Audio-Video Transport Working Group (January 1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endeavors Tech., Introducing Peer-To-Peer, White Paper. Endeavors Technology Inc. (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, Y., Eom, Y.: ‘An Efficient Peer Connection Scheme for Pure P2P Network Environment. Korea Information Science Society (February 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young-Mi Kim
    • 1
  • Dae-Joon Hwang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information and Communication EngineeringSungkyunkwan UniversitySuwon-citySouth Korea

Personalised recommendations