Re: [icnrg] low-latency and scalable video distribution

[Dirk Kutscher <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jens,

> quick background: my team and I wrote p2p video streaming protocols back in the day for Joost (2006 on-demand, 2008 live, give or take). A couple of years ago I realized that similar efforts tended to yield worse results (not in every aspect, this is very much a summary), and I sought funding for developing something new along those lines again. I received a grant, covid messed with my timing, and now I'm still in the earlier stages of it.
>
> The TL;DR is, I would very much like to contribute solutions to this problem. It's just a tad too early for a draft yet. Maybe I can get something together before the autumn conference.
>
> Happy to discuss here (or elsewhere)!

That's great – thanks for reaching out.

Happy to discuss these ideas further – either online or offline.

JFYI, ICNRG has a meeting on Friday (slightly different topics on the agenda, but might still be of interest).

Best regards,
Dirk




>
> Jens
>
> ------- Original Message -------
>
> On Thursday, March 24th, 2022 at 09:08, Dirk Kutscher <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Luca,
>>
>
>>> I was aware of these preliminary discussions but I'm still trying to
>>>
>
>>> understand
>>>
>
>>> the benefits of media over QUIC, beyond going through UDP port 443.
>>
>
>> Yes, exactly. IMO most of the arguments have to do with interests of existing stakeholders, existing code bases etc.
>>
>
>> But it should be mentioned that the aspired benefits from using some form of multicast cannot be achieved in connection-based streaming – unless you are not actually using QUIC...
>>
>
>> Or, unless you are creating an overlay QUIC relay network – not sure that's going to help with the low-latency...
>>
>
>>> M. Papalini et al., "On the Scalability of WebRTC with
>>>
>
>>> Information-Centric Networking," 2020 IEEE International Symposium on
>>>
>
>>> Local and Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN, 2020, pp. 1-6, doi:
>>>
>
>>> 10.1109/LANMAN49260.2020.9153228.
>>
>
>> Thanks – yes, I'm aware of that paper – good work.
>>
>
>>> ICN looks like a perfect match for these applications.
>>
>
>> Yes, I think many people would agree. For new-generation distribution (and possibly ingestion), IMO there is real value in having a unified system and protocol architecture for both unicast and multicast, and for both VoD and live streaming.
>>
>
>> However, I think it would be good to demonstrate experience with these large-scale low-latency scenarios more.
>>
>
>>> There is a big hicn code refactoring coming this week, or early next week
>>>
>
>>> in case all tests take longer to pass, in the linux foundation repository,
>>>
>
>>> with major emphasis on these use cases.
>>>
>
>>> At least for those who are interested in the code base.
>>
>
>> Great – looking forward to it. Please announce it on this list.
>>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>
>> Dirk
>>
>
>>> Luca
>>>
>
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:20 AM Dirk Kutscher [e-mail] wrote:
>>>
>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>
>>>> in case you missed it, the MOQ (Media over QUIC,
>>>>
>
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/113/materials/agenda-113-moq-06) BOF
>>>>
>
>>>> at IETF-113 is discussing low-latency video distribution use cases.
>>>>
>
>>>> The idea is to reduce latency for live streaming, i.e., achieving
>>>>
>
>>>> interactive conferencing latency without losing scalability.
>>>>
>
>>>> The current thinking is using either RUSH (
>>>>
>
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-kpugin-rush-00) or SRT over
>>>>
>
>>>> QUIC (meh ;-).
>>>>
>
>>>> I believe that eventual solutions will have to do with stream
>>>>
>
>>>> prioritization, "relaxed" congestion control and incorporating the concept
>>>>
>
>>>> of relays.
>>>>
>
>>>> Other topics/ideas that came up:
>>>>
>
>>>> - application layer multicast
>>>>
>
>>>> - local retransmissions
>>>>
>
>>>> - content naming
>>>>
>
>>>> Maybe something to look into from an ICN perspective...
>>>>
>
>>>> Dirk
>>>>
>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>
>>>> icnrg mailing list
>>>>
>
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>
>
>>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg
>>
>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>
>>> icnrg mailing list
>>>
>
>>> [e-mail]
>>>
>
>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg_______________________________________________
>>
>
>> icnrg mailing list
>>
>
>> [e-mail]
>>
>
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg_______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg