skip to main content
research-article

PPNet: Privacy Protected CDN-ISP Collaboration for QoS-aware Multi-CDN Adaptive Video Streaming

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 May 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Software-defined networking introduces opportunities to optimize the Internet Service Provider’s network and to improve client experience for the Video-on-Demand applications. Recent studies on SDN frameworks show that traffic engineering methods allow a fair share of bandwidth between adaptive video streaming clients. Additionally, ISPs can make better estimations of bandwidth and contribute to the bitrate selection for the clients. This study focuses on another aspect of network assistance in video delivery: CDN server selection. In a typical framework where the ISP contributes to the CDN selection, the video provider and the network provider interfaces are merged together. Clients connect to the ISP to get the best CDN server candidate for a given video. This exposes client requests to the ISP. However, video providers have been investing large resources for encrypted video provisioning to preserve their client’s information from third parties, especially network providers. The typical approach is not practical due to privacy concerns. In this study, we present a framework called PPNet to allow CDN-ISP collaboration while preventing the ISP’s access to the video request and availability information. Our framework introduces an isolation between the video provider’s and the ISP’s web interfaces. Clients connect to both of the interfaces and deliver information on a need-to-know basis. As a second contribution, PPNet introduces a practical optimization method for CDN selection. Real-time data collection capabilities of a typical OpenFlow network is used as the input for optimization. Congestion-awareness has been the priority. To adapt for changing network conditions, capability of utilizing multiple servers simultaneously for a single video is introduced. Instead of directing each video client into a CDN node, the proposed system performs request routing per video segment. Finally, we present a system prototype of PPNet and show that our multiple-host adaptive streaming method introduces a significant improvement in quality of experience when compared to the state of the art.

References

  1. 2015. Global Internet Phenomena, Latin America 8 North America—May 2015. Technical Report. Sandvine.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2018. Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Trends, 2017--2022, White Paper. Technical Report. Cisco.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Vijay Kumar Adhikari, Yang Guo, Fang Hao, Volker Hilt, and Zhi-Li Zhang. 2012. A tale of three CDNs: An active measurement study of Hulu and its CDNs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS’12). IEEE, 7--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Vijay Kumar Adhikari, Yang Guo, Fang Hao, Matteo Varvello, Volker Hilt, Moritz Steiner, and Zhi-Li Zhang. 2012. Unreeling netflix: Understanding and improving multi-cdn movie delivery. In Proceedings of the Annual IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’12). IEEE, 1620--1628.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Saamer Akhshabi, Lakshmi Anantakrishnan, Ali C. Begen, and Constantine Dovrolis. 2012. What happens when HTTP adaptive streaming players compete for bandwidth? In Proceedings of the 22nd International Workshop on Network and Operating System Support for Digital Audio and Video. ACM, 9--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Christelle Al Hasrouty, Vincent Autefage, Cristian Olariu, Damien Magoni, and John Murphy. 2016. SDN-driven multicast streams with adaptive bitrates for VoIP conferences. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Ahsan Arefin, Raoul Rivas, Rehana Tabassum, and Klara Nahrstedt. 2013. OpenSession: SDN-based cross-layer multi-stream management protocol for 3D teleimmersion. In Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP’13). IEEE, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Alon Atary and Anat Bremler-Barr. 2016. Efficient round-trip time monitoring in OpenFlow networks. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’16). IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. K. Tolga Bagci, Kemal E. Sahin, and A. Murat Tekalp. 2016. Queue-allocation optimization for adaptive video streaming over software defined networks with multiple service-levels. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP’16). IEEE, 1519--1523.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kadir Tolga Bagci, Kemal Emrecan Sahin, and A. Murat Tekalp. 2017. Compete or collaborate: Architectures for collaborative DASH video over future networks. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 19, 10 (2017), 2152--2165.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Abdelhak Bentaleb, Ali C. Begen, and Roger Zimmermann. 2016. SDNDASH: Improving QoE of HTTP adaptive streaming using software defined networking. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 1296--1305.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mark Berman, Jeffrey S. Chase, Lawrence Landweber, Akihiro Nakao, Max Ott, Dipankar Raychaudhuri, Robert Ricci, and Ivan Seskar. 2014. GENI: A federated testbed for innovative network experiments. Comput. Netw. 61 (2014), 5--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Divyashri Bhat, Amr Rizk, Michael Zink, and Ralf Steinmetz. 2018. SABR: Network-assisted content distribution for QoE-driven ABR video streaming. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 14, 2s (2018), 32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Matthew Broadbent, Daniel King, Sean Baildon, Nektarios Georgalas, and Nicholas Race. 2015. OpenCache: A software-defined content caching platform. In Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft’15). IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Dukhyun Chang, Junho Suh, Hyogi Jung, Ted Taekyoung Kwon, and Yanghee Choi. 2012. How to realize CDN interconnection (CDNI) over OpenFlow? In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Future Internet Technologies. ACM, 29--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Wei-Kuo Chiang and Tsung-Ying Li. 2016. An extended SDN-based in-network caching service for video on demand. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Computer Symposium (ICS’16). IEEE, 159--164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Hilmi E. Egilmez, Seyhan Civanlar, and A. Murat Tekalp. 2013. An optimization framework for QoS-enabled adaptive video streaming over OpenFlow networks. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 15, 3 (2013), 710--715.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Panagiotis Georgopoulos, Matthew Broadbent, Arsham Farshad, Bernhard Plattner, and Nicholas Race. 2015. Using software defined networking to enhance the delivery of video-on-demand. Comput. Commun. 69, C (2015), 79--87.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Panagiotis Georgopoulos, Yehia Elkhatib, Matthew Broadbent, Mu Mu, and Nicholas Race. 2013. Towards network-wide QoE fairness using openflow-assisted adaptive video streaming. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Future Human-centric Multimedia Networking. ACM, 15--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Paul Goransson, Chuck Black, and Timothy Culver. 2016. Software Defined Networks: A Comprehensive Approach. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Thinh Pham Hong, An Nguyen Duc, Thoa Nguyen, Truong Thu Huong, and Nam Pham Ngoc. 2017. Adaptation method for streaming of CBR video over HTTP based on software defined networking. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Communications (ATC’17). IEEE, 16--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Te-Yuan Huang, Nikhil Handigol, Brandon Heller, Nick McKeown, and Ramesh Johari. 2012. Confused, timid, and unstable: Picking a video streaming rate is hard. In Proceedings of the 2012 Internet Measurement Conference. ACM, 225--238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Narjes T. Jahromi, Sami Yangui, Adel Larabi, Daniel Smith, Mohammad A. Salahuddin, Roch H. Glitho, Richard Brunneri, and Halima Elbiaze. 2017. NFV and SDN-based cost-efficient and agile value-added video services provisioning in content delivery networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 14th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications 8 Networking Conference (CCNC’17). IEEE, 671--677.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Sushant Jain, Alok Kumar, Subhasree Mandal, Joon Ong, Leon Poutievski, Arjun Singh, Subbaiah Venkata, Jim Wanderer, Junlan Zhou, Min Zhu, et al. 2013. B4: Experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 43. ACM, 3--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Michael Jarschel, Florian Wamser, Thomas Hohn, Thomas Zinner, and Phuoc Tran-Gia. 2013. SDN-based application-aware networking on the example of youtube video streaming. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on Software Defined Networks (EWSDN’13). IEEE, 87--92.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Jan Willem Kleinrouweler, Sergio Cabrero, and Pablo Cesar. 2017. An SDN architecture for privacy-friendly network-assisted DASH. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 13, 3s (2017), 44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Simon Knight, Hung X. Nguyen, Nick Falkner, Rhys Bowden, and Matthew Roughan. 2011. The internet topology zoo. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 29, 9 (2011), 1765--1775.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Rupa Krishnan, Harsha V. Madhyastha, Sridhar Srinivasan, Sushant Jain, Arvind Krishnamurthy, Thomas Anderson, and Jie Gao. 2009. Moving beyond end-to-end path information to optimize CDN performance. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement. ACM, 190--201.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Danny H. Lee, Constantine Dovrolis, and Ali C. Begen. 2014. Caching in http adaptive streaming: Friend or foe? In Proceedings of the Network and Operating System Support on Digital Audio and Video Workshop. ACM, 31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Matthew Mathis, Jeffrey Semke, Jamshid Mahdavi, and Teunis Ott. 1997. The macroscopic behavior of the TCP congestion avoidance algorithm. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 27, 3 (1997), 67--82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Hyunwoo Nam. 2016. Measuring and Improving the Quality of Experience of Adaptive Rate Video. Columbia University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Hyunwoo Nam, Kyung-Hwa Kim, Jong Yul Kim, and Henning Schulzrinne. 2014. Towards QoE-aware video streaming using SDN. In Proceedings of the Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM’14). IEEE, 1317--1322.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Aous Thabit Naman, Yu Wang, Hassan Habibi Gharakheili, Vijay Sivaraman, and David Taubman. 2018. Responsive high throughput congestion control for interactive applications over SDN-enabled networks. Comput. Netw. 134 (2018), 152--166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. David Naylor, Alessandro Finamore, Ilias Leontiadis, Yan Grunenberger, Marco Mellia, Maurizio Munafò, Konstantina Papagiannaki, and Peter Steenkiste. 2014. The cost of the S in HTTPS. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM International on Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies. ACM, 133--140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Feng Qin, Zhifeng Zhao, and Honggang Zhang. 2016. Optimizing routing and server selection in intelligent SDN-based CDN. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Wireless Communications 8 Signal Processing (WCSP’16). IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Robert Ricci, Eric Eide, and CloudLab Team. 2014. Introducing CloudLab: Scientific infrastructure for advancing cloud architectures and applications. ; login:: 39, 6 (2014), 36--38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Zachary M. Seward. 2014. Netflix is making sure customers know whom to blame for slow, grainy video. Retrieved from https://qz.com/216609/netflixs-video-error-message-is-a-clever-attack-on-cable-companies/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Megumi Shibuya, Atsuo Tachibana, and Teruyuki Hasegawa. 2014. Efficient performance diagnosis in openflow networks based on active measurements. In Proc. 2014 ICN. 268–273.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Kevin Spiteri, Rahul Urgaonkar, and Ramesh K. Sitaraman. 2016. BOLA: Near-optimal bitrate adaptation for online videos. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’16). IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Randall Stewart, John-Mark Gurney, and Scott Long. 2015. Optimizing TLS for high-bandwidth applications in FreeBSD. In Proceedings of the Asia BSD Conference. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Sipat Triukose, Zhihua Wen, and Michael Rabinovich. 2011. Measuring a commercial content delivery network. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 467--476.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Matthias Wichtlhuber, Robert Reinecke, and David Hausheer. 2015. An SDN-based CDN/ISP collaboration architecture for managing high-volume flows. IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manage. 12, 1 (2015), 48--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Hao Yin, Xuening Liu, Tongyu Zhan, Vyas Sekar, Feng Qiu, Chuang Lin, Hui Zhang, and Bo Li. 2009. Design and deployment of a hybrid CDN-P2P system for live video streaming: Experiences with LiveSky. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 25--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. PPNet: Privacy Protected CDN-ISP Collaboration for QoS-aware Multi-CDN Adaptive Video Streaming

                Recommendations

                Comments

                Login options

                Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                Sign in

                Full Access

                PDF Format

                View or Download as a PDF file.

                PDF

                eReader

                View online with eReader.

                eReader

                HTML Format

                View this article in HTML Format .

                View HTML Format
                About Cookies On This Site

                We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

                Learn more

                Got it!