Network Resource Management Jason Gaedtke Chief Scientist W3C Video on the Web Workshop December 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Network Aware Forward Caching Presenter: Alexandre Gerber Jeffrey Erman, Mohammad T. Hajiaghayi, Dan Pei, Oliver Spatscheck AT&T Labs Research April 24.
Advertisements

Streaming Video over the Internet
Ningning HuCarnegie Mellon University1 Optimizing Network Performance In Replicated Hosting Peter Steenkiste (CMU) with Ningning Hu (CMU), Oliver Spatscheck.
Clayton Sullivan PEER-TO-PEER NETWORKS. INTRODUCTION What is a Peer-To-Peer Network A Peer Application Overlay Network Network Architecture and System.
Playback-buffer Equalization For Streaming Media Using Stateless Transport Prioritization By Wai-tian Tan, Weidong Cui and John G. Apostolopoulos Presented.
Receiver-driven Layered Multicast S. McCanne, V. Jacobsen and M. Vetterli University of Calif, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory SIGCOMM.
Networks & Multimedia Amit Pande, Post-doctoral fellow, Department of Computer Science, University of California Davis
Home Networking prepared for FCC Technical Advisory Committee 18 September 2002.
Application Layer 2-1 Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Application Layer – Lecture.
Application layer (continued) Week 4 – Lecture 2.
Chapter 3: Transport Layer
An Analysis of Internet Content Delivery Systems Stefan Saroiu, Krishna P. Gommadi, Richard J. Dunn, Steven D. Gribble, and Henry M. Levy Proceedings of.
Transport Layer3-1 Transport Layer Our goals: r understand principles behind transport layer services: m multiplexing/demultipl exing m reliable data transfer.
Lecture 8 Chapter 3 Transport Layer
Introduction to the Application Layer Computer Networks Computer Networks Spring 2012 Spring 2012.
Some slides are in courtesy of J. Kurose and K. Ross Review of Previous Lecture Electronic Mail: SMTP, POP3, IMAP DNS Socket programming with TCP.
1 Computer Networks Transport Layer Protocols. 2 Application-layer Protocols Application-layer protocols –one “piece” of an app –define messages exchanged.
8-1 Transport Layer Our goals: r understand principles behind transport layer services: m multiplexing/demultipl exing m reliable data transfer m flow.
Dr. Philip Cannata 1 Principles of Network Applications.
Tradeoffs in CDN Designs for Throughput Oriented Traffic Minlan Yu University of Southern California 1 Joint work with Wenjie Jiang, Haoyuan Li, and Ion.
Introduction 1 Lecture 5 Application Layer slides are modified from J. Kurose & K. Ross University of Nevada – Reno Computer Science & Engineering Department.
Measuring the experience consumers have when using broadband services Tim Gilfedder Technical Advisor 3 rd July 2015.
1 NETE4631 Communicating with the Cloud and Using Media and Streaming Lecture Notes #14.
Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach, 5 th edition. Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley, April A note on the use.
Chapter 2, slide: 1 CS 372 – introduction to computer networks* Monday June 28 Announcements: r Lab 1 is due today r Lab 2 is posted today and is due next.
2: Application Layer1 Chapter 2 Application Layer These slides derived from Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach, 6 th edition. Jim Kurose, Keith Ross.
APPA Community Broadband Conference ISP Network Challenges Peer-to-Peer Controls Mark Bailey, Channel Manager.
Review: –What is AS? –What is the routing algorithm in BGP? –How does it work? –Where is “policy” reflected in BGP (policy based routing)? –Give examples.
1 MultimEDia transport for mobIlE Video AppLications 9 th Concertation Meeting Brussels, 13 th February 2012 MEDIEVAL Consortium.
Providing Controlled Quality Assurance in Video Streaming across the Internet Yingfei Dong, Zhi-Li Zhang and Rohit Rakesh Computer Networking and Multimedia.
Application Layer 2-1 Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley March 2012.
CHAPTER 2. Creating a network app write programs that – run on (different) end systems – communicate over network – e.g., web server software communicates.
Spectranet - Confidential 1 IPv6 ; Internet User’s Perspective Content delivery from the edge; Indian Perspective APNIC30 August 2010.
Object and Event Recognition in Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks Clint Mueller CS441.
Skype P2P Kedar Kulkarni 04/02/09.
What makes a network good? Ch 2.1: Principles of Network Apps 2: Application Layer1.
Network Technologies essentials Week 9: Distributed file sharing & multimedia Compilation made by Tim Moors, UNSW Australia Original slides by David Wetherall,
Data Communications and Computer Networks Chapter 3 CS 3830 Lecture 12 Omar Meqdadi Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering University.
2: Application Layer 1 Chapter 2: Application layer r 2.1 Principles of network applications r 2.2 Web and HTTP r 2.3 FTP r 2.4 Electronic Mail  SMTP,
CS 1652 The slides are adapted from the publisher’s material All material copyright J.F Kurose and K.W. Ross, All Rights Reserved Jack Lange.
A novel approach of gateway selection and placement in cellular Wi-Fi system Presented By Rajesh Prasad.
Transport Layer and UDP Tahir Azim Ref:
The Transport Layer application transport network data link physical application transport network data link physical application transport network data.
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. Page 1 Survey of P2P Streaming HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. Ning Zong, Johnson Jiang.
1 End-user Protocols, Services and QoS. 2 Layering: logical communication application transport network link physical application transport network link.
Towards Exploiting User- Centric Information for Proactive Caching in Mobile Networks ‡ , WWRF28, Athens Xenofon Vasilakos Xenofon Vasilakos,
CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS
Application Layer 2-1 Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley March 2012.
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 Efficient Path Aggregation and Error Control for Video Streaming OMESH TICKOO, Shiv Kalyanaraman,
Content distribution and “protocol”: from hierarchical trees to distributed graphs Jason Gaedtke November 7, 2007.
Transport Layer 3-1 Chapter 3 Outline r 3.1 Transport-layer services r 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing r 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP.
Chapter 3: Transport Layer Our goals: r understand principles behind transport layer services: m multiplexing/demultipl exing m reliable data transfer.
FCC Broadband Workshop on Future Fiber Architectures and Local Deployment Choices David Reed EVP & Chief Strategy Officer Cable Television Laboratories,
Overlay Networks: An Akamai Perspective Ramesh K. Sitaraman, mangesh kasbekar, Woody Lichtenstein, and Manish Jain Akamai Technologies Inc Univerisy of.
Network Management has always been and always will be essential to the Internet Testimony of George Ou Former Network Engineer FCC.
Doc.: IEEE /345r0 Submission May 2002 Albert Young, Ralink TechnologySlide 1 Enabling Seamless Hand-Off Across Wireless Networks Albert Young.
MiddleMan: A Video Caching Proxy Server NOSSDAV 2000 Brian Smith Department of Computer Science Cornell University Ithaca, NY Soam Acharya Inktomi Corporation.
MULTIPLEXING/DEMULTIPLEXING, CONNECTIONLESS TRANSPORT.
P2P Search COP P2P Search Techniques Centralized P2P systems  e.g. Napster, Decentralized & unstructured P2P systems  e.g. Gnutella.
Transport Layer3-1 Chapter 3: Transport Layer Our goals: r understand principles behind transport layer services: m multiplexing/demultipl exing m reliable.
Our Place in the Cloud DCIA P2P & Cloud Market Conference March 9, 2010.
2: Transport Layer 11 Transport Layer 1. 2: Transport Layer 12 Part 2: Transport Layer Chapter goals: r understand principles behind transport layer services:
A special acknowledge goes to J.F Kurose and K.W. Ross Some of the slides used in this lecture are adapted from their original slides that accompany the.
IPv6 Deployment: Business Cases and Development Options
Principles of Network Applications
TCP-LP: A Distributed Algorithm for Low Priority Data Transfer
Chapter 2 Introduction Application Requirements VS. Transport Services
Challenges with developing a Commercial P2P System
Presentation transcript:

Network Resource Management Jason Gaedtke Chief Scientist W3C Video on the Web Workshop December 2007

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential2 Topics Abstract  Compelling network neutrality arguments notwithstanding, not all IP traffic exhibits uniform distribution requirements (e.g., bandwidth, latency, jitter and TTL).  Further, automated P2P file-sharing agents exploit TCP congestion control algorithms to gain a disproportionate share of network resources.  Some measures should be explored to address this natural, shared-network heterogeneity. Heterogeneous Applications and Network Requirements Web Video Distribution Trends A Resource Consumption Example (Briscoe Draft) Potential Management Strategies References and Collaborative Activities

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential3 Heterogeneous Apps and Network Reqs Real-Time Apps: dependent upon low-latency delivery, exhibit highly-variable bandwidth requirements, few simultaneous connections  Online gaming  VoIP and video chat  IM and Presence  Streaming video Interactive Services: tolerant of modest delivery delays, modest bandwidth, few simultaneous connections   Web browsing  Progressive download Content Distribution: automated, many simultaneous connections, greedy – will consume available bandwidth  P2P file-sharing  File/mail/news/Web servers

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential4 Web Video Distribution (Background) Web Servers/Farms  Simple client/server architecture  Commodity servers, scaled horizontally –Capacity –Redundancy/Availability Content Distribution Networks (CDNs)  Specialized client/server architecture with aggressive caching  Geographical distribution and load-balancing P2P Networks  Decentralized, distributed and self-organizing  “Super-nodes” avoid n 2 link scaling and search  Participants contribute bandwidth, storage and processing Hybrid CDN/P2P Networks  Benefits of P2P resource sharing; <10% distro costs  Seed and “long-tail” content sourced via CDN caches

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential5 A Resource Consumption Example (Briscoe, draft-briscoe-tsvwg-relax-fairness) 10Mbps, shared access network, 100 subscribers  80 subscribers primarily interactive Web/ –10% concurrency, 2 TCP connections each –9.9kbps average during congestion –7.1MB per day (16-hours active)  20 automated P2P file-sharing clients: –100% concurrency, 100 TCP connections each –496kbps average during congestion –3.6GB per day – 500:1 volume skew TCP congestion control treats each flow equally; greedy apps spawn many connections

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential6 Resource Consumption (4x Capacity) 40Mbps shared, 100 subscribers  80 interactive Web/ –4% active (due to more responsive apps) –40kbps (vs. ~10kbps) during congestion –11MB (vs. ~7MB) per day  20 automated P2P file-sharing: –2Mbps (vs. ~500kbps) during congestion –14GB (vs. ~3.5GB) per day As expected, a 4x increase in network capacity yields a 4x increase in average, per-flow rates under congestion; only exacerbates skew (>1250:1)

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential7 Resource Consumption (Capacity + Churn) 40Mbps shared, 60 subscribers:  50 interactive Web/ (30 churn): –2.5% active –80kbps (vs. 40kbps) during congestion –14MB (vs. 11MB) per day  10 automated P2P file-sharing (10 churn): –4Mbps (vs. 2Mbps) during congestion –29GB (vs. 14GB) per day Trends: fewer subscribers, greater network capacity/cost, >2000:1 consumption skew; ergo, rational operators will not add capacity

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential8 Resource Consumption Summary TCP congestion control treats all flows equally Automated P2P agents are (very) greedy  100+ simultaneous connections  100% concurrency These aggressive algorithms will absorb an increasing amount of added capacity, thus degrading cost/benefit for other users Light, interactive users subsidize P2P distribution New economic/technical management strategies should be explored

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential9 Potential Management Strategies Upstream/downstream rate limiting Aggregate capacity limiting (tiering) Application-specific throttling (via DPI) Differentiated/priority service classes Reservation-based resource management Explicit protocol-level feedback/heuristics Variable/metered pricing strategies Bandwidth/resource trading schemes and virtual economies Others?

5/20/2015© Cable Television Laboratories, Inc All Rights Reserved. Proprietary/Confidential10 References and Collaborative Activities IETF Transport Area  RFC 2309: Recommendations on Queue Management and Congestion Avoidance  RFC 2581: TCP Congestion Control  RFC 2914: Congestion Control Principles  draft-briscoe-tsvwg-relax-fairness DCIA P4P Working Group CableLabs PacketCable Multimedia QoS DSL Forum TR 58/59 Harvard SEAS and Tribler.org  Bandwidth Virtual Economy