This application is a National Stage Application and claims the benefit, under 35 U.S.C. §365 of International Application PCT/US2006/024975 filed Jun. 27, 2006, which was published in accordance with PCT Article 21(2) on Jan. 3, 2008 in English, and which claims.
The present invention relates to support for user interactivity/operations of a video playback device for a performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service.
Traditionally, the client-server service model has been used to provide streaming service. A client sends a request to a server, which then streams the content to the client if the server has enough resources to serve the client's request and there is enough bandwidth along the path between the server and the client.
Due to the limited computation and storage resource at the server and limited bandwidth in the network connecting the server and clients, scalability has been an issue with client-server streaming service. Recently, peer-to-peer techniques have been introduced into streaming service. Peers are implemented with the capabilities of clients and servers and contribute to alleviate the workload imposed on the server and distribute the bandwidth requirements across the network by actively caching the content and serving other peers. Studies have shown that peer-to-peer techniques greatly improve system scalability, enabling the system to serve many much more users.
There have been significant efforts to address the scalability issue presented in streaming media service using peer-to-peer networking. These efforts can be classified into two categories notably peer-to-peer live streaming and peer-to-peer stored video streaming or video-on-demand. While both services strive to support a large number of users while offering users good viewing quality, they also face different technical challenges. In peer-to-peer live streaming, minimizing the start-up delay without sacrificing the system scalability is the challenge. In peer-to-peer video-on-demand service, allowing asynchronous users to share is the challenge.
Peer-to-peer streaming schemes also distinguish themselves by the different data dissemination techniques. Two data dissemination methods have been investigated—notably the overlay-based approach and the data-driven approach. In the overlay-based approach, the peers form a mesh or tree structure where parent-child relationships are formed among the peers. A child peer receives data from its parent. In contrast, the peers in the data-driven approach do not have fixed parent-child relationships. The peers look for the missing data, and retrieve the missing data wherever available. While the overlay-based approach is widely used in early peer-to-peer efforts, the data-driven approach is becoming more popular since it addresses the churn and asymmetric bandwidth problem effectively.
While most of the prior art efforts exhibit good scalability and support a greater number of users compared to a traditional client-server service model, the prior art schemes are best-effort in nature and the support of system performance requirements has not been fully investigated. Using a performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service, also means that operations involving user interactivity with a video playback device must be handled differently. To date the prior art has not addressed the handling of such video playback device operations.
Performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service allows users to select and watch video content over a network whenever they want. In a related application, segmented peer-to-peer video sharing was described. This enabled content sharing in a video-on-demand environment. Performance was addressed by peer-to-peer data downloading and server assisted complementary streaming.
The present invention is directed towards supporting user interactivity/operations for video playback devices for a performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service. Such operations include jump forward/backward, pause/resume, fast forward, and fast reverse.
A method and apparatus for supporting video playback operations for a peer-to-peer video on demand service are described comprising detecting a video playback operation and detecting a sub-clip type. The method and apparatus also receive a streamed leading video sub-clip, determine a set of needed video sub-clips, locate one of the set of needed video sub-clips and downloading the located video sub-clip.
The present invention is best understood from the following detailed description when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. The drawings include the following figures briefly described below where like-numbers on the figures represent similar elements:
Users of video-on-demand service watch different portions of video at any given moment. In order to enable the content sharing among users and maximize the amount of content that is delivered through a peer-to-peer network, it is assumed that each user has the storage capacity to cache a partial copy and/or the entire copy of content that has been played. This is a reasonable assumption given the rapidly increasing storage capacity of video playback devices. It should be noted that a video playback device is any device capable of receiving and playing back video (stored or live) including but not limited to computers, laptops, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and mobile devices. A peer-to-peer network is not limited to a wired line network and may be a wireless or wired line network or a hybrid network employing both wired line and wireless connections.
In the segmented peer-to-peer video-on-demand method and apparatus of the present invention, a video clip is divided into multiple equal length segments, denominated sub-clips. The playback time of the start of the sub-clip is defined as the deadline of this sub-clip. The leading sub-clips are streamed to the video playback device so that the users can start the playback immediately. Meanwhile, a peer-to-peer network is established among users in order to pre-fetch the data of the succeeding sub-clips. In accordance with the system performance aware scheme of the present invention, the data of a sub-clip has to be pre-fetched before its deadline. Once the playback of a sub-clip has started, no peer-to-peer downloading of that sub-clip is allowed since the newly downloaded data may be outdated. Complementary streaming from the original server is initiated from this point on for better system performance. Complementary streaming is described below.
An example is used to illustrate how segmented peer-to-peer video-on-demand serves incoming requests. In this example, it is assumed that users are able to cache the entire copy of the video. The same technique applies even if only a portion of the video copy is cached. It is further assumed that the server only streams the first sub-clip and the data of following sub-clips are downloaded using the peer-to-peer network. The algorithm to compute the number of streamed sub-clips will be presented and described below.
Referring now to
As discussed above, although extra care is taken to address the performance issues (timely arrival of the sub-clips at/by the user), some data may still be missing by the time of deadline (or shortly before the deadline) when peer-to-peer downloading ceases. How to use the server to stream the missing data so as to further improve the peer video playback performance is now described. This is called complementary streaming herein. As the deadline approaches, the peer client prepares a missing data vector Vmissing, which is a bit map that uses a first flag, for example “1” to indicate that a block is received, and a second flag, for example “0” to indicate a block is still missing. The missing data vector is sent to the server (signaling). The server starts to stream out the missing data at the normal playback rate as the deadline approaches so that the missing data/video can be filled in time for the peer video playback.
Supporting user interactivity, i.e., video device playback operations, is an important aspect of video-on-demand service. Users invoking jump forward/backward operations want to playback the video from an arbitrary point inside the clip at the normal playback rate. Letting the target playback point, or TPP denote the intended new playback point. If TPP is later than the current playback point, it is a jump forward operation. Otherwise, it is a jump backward operation.
As shown above in
The number of streamed sub-clips is maximized when no data after the target playback point (TPP) is cached in the buffer. In such scenario, supporting jump forward/backward operations is similar to starting a new video from the TPP. Suppose the TPP falls into sub-clip i. Below the method to compute the maximum number of streamed sub-clips is described, assuming no data is cached for the sub-clip k, for k>i.
The time interval from the TPP to the end of sub-clip i is denoted by tleftover, and the maximum number of streamed sub-clips is denoted by n*. Thus, the relationship
(rdownlink−rplayback)(tleftover+n*L)≧rplaybackL
where rdownlink is the downlink speed, rplayback is the playback rate, and L is the duration of the sub-clip is derived. Since n* has to be an integer, and has to be no greater than the total number of sub-clips after the sub-clip i,
where (.)+ is a non-negative function, and N is the total number of sub-clips.
Next the actual number of sub-clips needed to be streamed is investigated. There are four types of sub-clips in performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service: empty sub-clip, downloaded sub-clip, streamed sub-clip, and downloading-in-process sub-clip. Both streamed sub-clips and downloading-in-process sub-clips cache portions of the sub-clip data so are treated herein the same as empty sub-clips. This simplifies the problem and a conservative number of streamed sub-clips is, thus, computed. Applying complementary streaming if a portion of the data is available in the buffer is recommended.
Next, how to adjust the sub-clip deadlines to accommodate jump forward/backward operations is considered. Let t denote the current time, and
for i≦k≦N, where L is the duration of a sub-clip.
Supporting the pause operation in performance aware peer-to-peer video-on-demand service is straightforward—just stop the video playback and pause any ongoing streaming or downloading. The sub-clip deadlines are changed to be infinite to postpone the downloading process. Note that the pause operation only occurs in streamed sub-clips and downloaded sub-clips.
The resume operation is handled differently depending upon the type of sub-clip. Suppose that the video is paused at sub-clip i. If the current sub-clip is a streamed sub-clip, the user via the video playback device signals the server to resume the playback. The server also resumes streaming the sub-clips that had been designated to be streamed before the pause operation was invoked. The rationale behind this is that all the actions are temporarily suspended by the pause operation, and the resume operation re-starts the streaming without changing the system status. Meanwhile, the sub-clip deadlines are modified to reflect the elapsed time incurred by the pause operation. Suppose that the playback time from the resumption point to the beginning of the following sub-clip i+1 is tleftover, and the current time is t, equation (2) is used to compute the new deadlines.
If the pausing point falls in a downloaded sub-clip, the user via the video playback device resumes the playing of current sub-clip immediately, resumes the downloading process, and the deadlines of following sub-clips are modified using equation (2) as well.
For the fast forward operation, the video is played back at a higher rate than the normal playback rate. The speedup factor of the fast forward operation is denoted by δ. The playback rate for the fast forward operation is δ·rplayback.
In the following, the maximum number of streamed sub-clips, n* is calculated first. Then the actual number of streamed sub-clips is calculated. Finally, modification of the sub-clip deadlines is performed. It will become obvious that there is a strong correlation between jump forward operation and fast forward operation.
The time interval from the starting playback point to the end of current sub-clip is denoted by tleftover. The playback rate for the fast forward operation is denoted as r′playback, i.e., r′playback=δ·rplayback. Thus, the following relationship is derived
(rdownlink−rplayback)(tleftover−n*L)/δ≧rplaybackL (Equation 3)
It should be noted that the second term on the left hand side of equation (3) is divided by δ to reflect the fact that the playback rate is sped up by a factor of δ. Since n* has to be an integer and no larger than N−i, the following relationship can be derived
The method of
The leftover time for the fast reverse operation is the time interval from the current playback point to the beginning of current sub-clip. Using tleftover to denote the leftover time for the fast reverse operation, the maximum number of streamed sub-clips is:
Equation 4 and equation 6 are similar except for the last term, which can be explained by the opposite playback directions. It should also be noted that both fast forward and fast reverse operations can be implemented for multiple speeds in either direction.
The method illustrated in
The deadline for sub-clip k, 1<k<i, can be calculated as follows:
If the video playback operation is a pause operation then at 635 video playback is stopped; streaming is stopped; downloading is stopped; and the sub-clip deadlines are set to infinity. If the video playback operation is a resume operation then at 645 new sub-clip deadlines are calculated as a result of the pause operation; if sub-clip(s) were being streamed then resume streaming sub-clips; start video playback; and resume downloading any sub-clips that were scheduled to be downloaded.
If the video playback operation is a fast forward operation then at 655 a calculation is made of the new sped-up playback rate; a determination of the maximum number of sub-clip necessary to stream is made; a determination of the actual number of sub-clips to be streamed is made based on what is already fully cached; streaming of the sub-clip containing the TPP is started (if the sub-clip containing the TPP is not fully cached); new sub-clip deadlines are calculated; playback is started; and downloading of sub-clips beyond the streamed sub-clips is started. The similar procedure applies for the fast reverse operation, except Equation 6 replaces equation 4 in computing the actual number of streamed sub-clips. It should be remembered that both fast forward and fast reverse can be implemented for multiple speeds in either direction.
It is to be understood that the present invention may be implemented in various forms of hardware, software, firmware, special purpose processors, or a combination thereof. Preferably, the present invention is implemented as a combination of hardware and software. Moreover, the software is preferably implemented as an application program tangibly embodied on a program storage device. The application program may be uploaded to, and executed by, a machine comprising any suitable architecture. Preferably, the machine is implemented on a computer platform having hardware such as one or more central processing units (CPU), a random access memory (RAM), and input/output (I/O) interface(s). The computer platform also includes an operating system and microinstruction code. The various processes and functions described herein may either be part of the microinstruction code or part of the application program (or a combination thereof), which is executed via the operating system. In addition, various other peripheral devices may be connected to the computer platform such as an additional data storage device and a printing device.
It is to be further understood that, because some of the constituent system components and method steps depicted in the accompanying figures are preferably implemented in software, the actual connections between the system components (or the process steps) may differ depending upon the manner in which the present invention is programmed. Given the teachings herein, one of ordinary skill in the related art will be able to contemplate these and similar implementations or configurations of the present invention.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2006/024975 | 6/27/2006 | WO | 00 | 12/3/2008 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2008/002296 | 1/3/2008 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6949022 | Showers et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
7672235 | Lian et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7698386 | Amidon et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7809388 | Othmer | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7983196 | Yanagihara | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8005889 | Issa et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8231462 | Showers et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
20020114465 | Shen-Orr et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020191952 | Fiore et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009577 | Apostolopoulos et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030065712 | Cheung et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030152034 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040010593 | Apostolopoulos et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040210663 | Phillips et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040225713 | Abbasi et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050108203 | Tang et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050119976 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138192 | Encarnacion et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050210394 | Crandall et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050262257 | Major et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060010225 | Issa | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060136551 | Amidon et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060209701 | Zhang et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060242240 | Parker et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070094272 | Yeh | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094405 | Zhang | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070174246 | Sigurdsson et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO03088561 | Oct 2003 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Gao, Yang, et. al. “Supporting VCR Operation in a Mesh-Based PSP VoD System.” Consumer Communicatins and Networking Conference, 2008. CCNC 2008. 5th IEEE, IEEE CCP, Piscataway, NJ. Jan. 1, 2008. XP031211916. |
Luo, Jian-Guang, et al. “Chasing: An Efficient Streaming Mechanism for Scalable and Resilient Video-On-Demand Service Over Peer-to-Peer Networks.” Networking Technologies, Services, and Protocols; Performance of Computer and Communication Networks; Mobile and Wireless Communications Systems Lecture Notes in Computer Science; LNCE, Springer, Berlin, DE, vol. 3976, Jun. 11, 2006, pp. 642-653, XP019030868. |
Sharma, Abhishek, et al. “dPAM: A Distributed Prefetching Protocol for Scalable Asynchronous Multicast in P2P Systems.” INFOCOM2005. 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, Proceedings IEEE Miami, FL, USA Mar. 13-17, 2005, Piscataway, NJ, IEEE, Piscataway NJ USA, vol. 2, Mar. 13, 2005, pp. 1139-1150, XP010829219. |
Yiu, W. P. Ken, et al. “Distributed Storage to Support User Interactivity in Peer-to-Peer Video Streaming.” Communications, 2006. ICC '06. IEEE International Conference on, IEEE, PI Jun. 1, 2006, pp. 55-60, XP031025030. |
Zheng, Changxi, et al. “Distributed Prefetching Scheme for Random Seek Support in Peer-to-Peer Streaming Applications.” P2PMMS '05, Nov. 11, 2005. Singapore. XP40030475A 1. |
Supplementary European Search Report for Application No. EP 06 77 4101. Dated Aug. 11, 2009. |
Yiu et al., “Distributed Storage to Support User Interactivity in Peer-to-Peer Video Streaming,” Proc. of IEEE Int'l. Conference on Communications (ICC'06), Jun. 11, 2006, pp. 55-60. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090202221 A1 | Aug 2009 | US |