Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal
Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com> Fri, 15 October 2010 07:22 UTC
Return-Path: <wenboz@google.com>
X-Original-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956313A6C5C for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:22:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.186
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.186 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_MILLIONSOF=0.315, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Cjly7KVg3By for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B7A3A6C57 for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o9F7NLJD024303 for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:21 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1287127401; bh=Fc8FvuYcan18ijmtn8oux2P6AEg=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Vs1xOF8Eku6RJosZHrs8OKCdMmJCbvgaSO2QLPhW46z31RIaGuLyd9rWX7WrqpAOm hKKFrcJABHT9hTlWl7nBQ==
Received: from ywc21 (ywc21.prod.google.com [10.192.3.21]) by wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o9F7MwHb029411 for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:20 -0700
Received: by ywc21 with SMTP id 21so406672ywc.2 for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4WLmJJ/CfLug5/Nc2g+3JAy9G93e8V/vp1zhnrK1G8U=; b=pEsMb1Um7W/rhcqvoaCZccn5MQ/J21az6YR533ogEIFNrK8ktJmUhOIccZF7j6BAZl rkE4njcUf57q+3jG7ZXg==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MN+sgVJfKRHRpXNTePh8o0k9Ie2y759Ssh3GPKGuTkJAWLRi7p0Mqve+tRgwZCdMVr xAReqstFJlr0JS/p4xbQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.90.78.20 with SMTP id a20mr5431032agb.93.1287127398489; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.91.213.18 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <02e301cb6c18$2dda7ea0$30298a0a@china.huawei.com>
References: <00df01cb5de2$2ac49730$4f548a0a@china.huawei.com> <AANLkTimB3-=zWGnT=uq9Qcb-N8Pq+-RR0WMN12BZ9pr4@mail.gmail.com> <03f501cb65a1$50699d70$f13cd850$%roni@huawei.com> <B1C30D3B-6D5C-46B9-848D-3AE0C8B6058C@csperkins.org> <9690AB8A-315E-4730-ABD8-78F4BB3E4CB6@nokia.com> <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D5BF35F@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com> <4FFB3304-9F44-454D-9AF3-6194045F1030@netflix.com> <029d01cb693a$7f515f50$30298a0a@china.huawei.com> <9062141B-82B8-4FF0-98C2-EB803BCA3DD7@netflix.com> <03e201cb6b6a$db1ae770$30298a0a@china.huawei.com> <B9E38A06-8392-4CCF-9160-D55F43BD75D8@netflix.com> <02e301cb6c18$2dda7ea0$30298a0a@china.huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:23:18 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimWMndpVr1RbS70rW6WmVDe7DvhwW0Rb2RbU=kq@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>
To: Qin Wu <sunseawq@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: httpstreaming@ietf.org, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal
X-BeenThere: httpstreaming@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network based HTTP Streaming discussion list <httpstreaming.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming>
List-Post: <mailto:httpstreaming@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 07:22:04 -0000
Seems we are starting to talk about very specific issues here. Probably a good idea to start a separate thread, with the existing arguments summarized? On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Qin Wu <sunseawq@huawei.com> wrote: > > I respect your opionion although I can't agree with you. I would like to > hear what other people thinks. Thanks! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mark Watson > To: Qin Wu > Cc: Ali C. Begen (abegen) ; httpstreaming@ietf.org ; Colin Perkins > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 12:26 AM > Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal > > On Oct 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Qin Wu wrote: > > Hi, > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mark Watson > To: Qin Wu > Cc: Ali C. Begen (abegen) ; httpstreaming@ietf.org ; Colin Perkins > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:50 AM > Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal > Some comments online ... > > Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 11, 2010, at 7:50 PM, "Qin Wu" <sunseawq@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi, > This is what we had discussed in the DISPATCH mailing list before we move > to this discuss list. > If you look at the description of discuss list, " > offers more efficient transport > and better network capability for real time streaming media > and allows interoperability with other streaming techniques and existing > Progressive dowloaded based > HTTP streaming implementation. > " > you will see we are on the same page. > Therefore one important goal discussed in the draft aims at developing > interoperable solution to > provide better transport to satisfy the real time streaming QOE requirement. > Especially serveral > chanllenges/problems we explored in the draft listed below. > > Regards! > -Qin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mark Watson > To: Ali C. Begen (abegen) > Cc: httpstreaming@ietf.org ; Colin Perkins > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 7:13 AM > Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal > All, > I would like to add my support to the comments below. Specifically, I think > if the IETF considers work in this area it should focus on the HTTP and TCP > protocols. Any such work may not be specific to HTTP-streaming (i.e. > enhancements that are at first motivated by HTTP Streaming may have broader > applicability, and this should be carefully considered). > In the draft I do not see a clear or correct identification of the problems. > For example in the introduction the following are stated as issues: > > - Client polling for each new data in chunks using HTTP requests is > not efficient to deliver high-quality video content across the > Internet > > MW: Several companies, including my employer, are successfully operating > large scale HTTP streaming systems that do efficiently deliver high-quality > video content across the Internet, so reality seems to refute this > statement. > > [Qin]: Not sure they can provide the TV experience for all the connected > devices like smartphones, PCs and tablets. Also not sure they can provide > the same quality of experence for all the all the connected devices. As we > discussed in this thread, a minimum of 20 seconds to start your video often > frustrated users to keep on watching and provide very limited user > experience. > > Can you be more explicit about the problems that you see? I'm not sure where > the 20s figure comes from. I do not see any problem in supporting startup > times comparable to TV channel change with adaptive HTTP streaming. > I am not saying there is no room for improvement in the various deployed > systems, but I do not see major technical impediments to efficient delivery > of high quality video using HTTP Streaming. > > [Qin]:Not only starup latency but also delay w.r.t. real time streaming. I > think you negect it becos You didn't get into the discussion list. > > On the other hand, I think we should bear in mind HTTP is formerly designed > for browsing webpage, transport static contents like HTML page, plugin, > picture, when we are going to use HTTP to deliver real time streaming > contents, we can not expect to get higher user experience. Therefore the > current streaming schemes can only offer a better experience over slower > connections. > > - Segmentation capability requires over-utilizing CPU and bandwidth > resources, which may not be a desirable and effective way to improve > the quality of streaming media delivery > > MW: It is not clear that segmentation per se is CPU-intensive or has any > non-negligable effect on bandwidth usage. > > [Qin]: Since HTTP streaming server is the combination of streaming server > and regular web server, I think the answer is both. > > [MW] what do you mean by' http streaming server' ? > > [Qin]: With streaming capability and functionality to respond to HTTP > connection. > > [MW] I'm not sure what one of those is. It sounds like it is not a regular > web server. I think it's an essential feature of modern HTTP streaming that > it works with regular web infrastructure. > > - Lack of QoS guarantee on the packet switching based Internet , the > quality of Internet media streaming may significant degrade due to > rising usage > > MW: An alternative view is that where quality is degraded due to congestion > this is due to lack of bandwidth, rather than a lack of QoS guarantees. > Adaptive HTTP streaming systems adjust the video quality to the available > bandwidth in order to avoid rebuffering events. It is the available > bandwidth that needs to be improved to improve quality. > > [Qin]: What I emphasize here is with growing popularity of HTTP streaming > traffic, when thousands or millions of people are accessing the same media > contents, the big problem we are facing is serious high concurrence access > issue. The user experience will be greatly affected even you have enough > available bandwidth. So this is not pure bandwidth issue. > > [MW] maybe we mean different things by 'available bandwidth'. Do you think > it is a server scalability problem, or a network problem ? > > [Qin]: please > read http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming/current/msg00011.html > > [MW] Still not sure what you're referring to other than available bandwidth. > The thread mentions multicast - do you think there remains work to deliver > HTTP objects over multicast given the work in RMT over the years ? > > - Experience burstiness or other dynamics changes due to bandwidth > fluctuations and heterogeneous handover. > > MW: We have found that adaptive HTTP streaming algorithms are well able to > cope with bandwidth fluctuations. > > [Qin]: I don't doubt that adaptive HTTP streaming algorithms can cope with > bandwidth fluctation. But I hope we can do better.e.g., adaptive HTTP > streaming algorithms only support delivery of multiple streams of the same > content with varying quality levels for different bandwidth or devices. > Howeve how the server in push model or client in pull model can quick > response to the bitrate changes is a problem we may look at,especially when > switching beween streams occurs very frequently. > > [MW] Yes, but not a problem for the IETF, I think. > > [Qin]: I didn't get what you said. adaptive HTTP streaming algorithms is > characterized as client initiated pull model. We are discussing push model > or how to use pull model with push model.We are talking about different > model. There are plenty room for IETF to do for this. > > [MW] Sorry, I don't understand what the "push" model has to do with HTTP > Streaming. Are you talking about servers which are not regular HTTP servers > ? I think this is not what people usually mean when they say "HTTP > streaming" - you should rename the work if that is the case. > > - Impossible to fast-forward through any part of a streaming > contents until it is stored on the user's device > > MW: This is simply not correct, since there are hundreds of examples of > devices which support trick-play using HTTP streaming techniques without > storing the whole content on the users device. > > [Qin]: Fast forward capabilty is not the most important feature we are > looking for. However I am hard to believe existing HTTP streaming techniques > can provide the same degree of playbackcontrol that DVD player can provides > or RTSP protocol provides. E.g., In the adaptive HTTP streaming algorithms, > the trick play is limited to pause/resume/stop by driving the HTTP request. > If the contents hasn't been dowloaded and the consume want fast forward, the > HTTP client needs to issue another new HTTP request to fetch the contents > which willcause unacceptable latency to the consumer. > > [MW] Again, the experience of millions of existing customers refutes what > you claim. Why do you think it is necessarily so slow to issue a new HTTP > request for a different part of the content? > > [Qin]: You didn't see the reaon behind this, becos the existing customers > has no choice when they view live streaming, what they can get is close to > live experience rather than real time user experience. Operatoer do nothing > for their network to make http streaming more controllable and managable. > Therefore more and more consumer tend to choose non-live content. that's why > we see more and more non-live content consumers rather than live contents > consumers. > > [MW] Well, I'm not sure I understand the point. But still the statement in > the draft is not true. > ...Mark > > A first step in considering what, if any, work should be done here might be > to contact those organizations which are standardizing the higher layers of > HTTP streaming systems (e.g. manifest and file formats) and ask whether > there are deficiencies they see in IETF protocols that could be usefully > addressed by the IETF. What I think we should avoid in the IETF is > duplicating the work of these other bodies. > > Best, > > Mark Watson > > Netflix Inc. > > > > On Oct 10, 2010, at 12:43 AM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Lars Eggert > > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 4:17 PM > > To: Colin Perkins > > Cc: httpstreaming@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal > > On 2010-10-7, at 14:16, Colin Perkins wrote: > > There are clearly some issues to consider here. What seems to be > > missing from the discussion to me though, is some identification of > > the concrete problems. What protocol pieces do we need, but not have? > > What protocols are problematic, and need enhancement? Is there > > protocol work to do in IETF, or should we be documenting best current > > practices for using the existing protocols and/or relying on other > > bodies to fill the gaps? > > The draft-wu-http-streaming-optimization-ps is a good start at such an > > analysis, but doesn't go deep enough to let us decide what work IETF > > should do. > > +1 > > The key question really is "what do you think the IETF needs to do?" > > I imagine the only work the IETF should do (if we decide to) is the > transport and HTTP-layer optimization for better streaming performance. > > -acbegen > > Lars > > _______________________________________________ > httpstreaming mailing list > httpstreaming@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming > > > > ________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > httpstreaming mailing list > httpstreaming@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming > > > _______________________________________________ > httpstreaming mailing list > httpstreaming@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming > >
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal David A. Bryan
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ben Niven-Jenkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Luby, Michael
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Daniel Park
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Roni Even
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Roni Even
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Kathy McEwen
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Kathy McEwen
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Kathy McEwen
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Colin Perkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Lars Eggert
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Mark Watson
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ye-Kui Wang
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Mark Watson
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Lars Eggert
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Mark Watson
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ning Zong
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Mark Watson
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ning Zong
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ye-Kui Wang
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Qin Wu
- [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull (was Re: Current Sta… Ben Niven-Jenkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull (was Re: Current… Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull (was Re: Current… Mark Watson
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull (was Re: Current… Ning Zong
- [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Status a… Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Thomas Stockhammer
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Thomas Stockhammer
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Qin Wu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Thomas Stockhammer
- Re: [httpstreaming] Push Vs Pull Re: Current Stat… Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Colin Perkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal David R Oran
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Benjamin Niven-Jenkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Thomas Stockhammer
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Colin Perkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Wenbo Zhu
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ning Zong
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ning Zong
- Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal Ali C. Begen (abegen)