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

[Dirk Kutscher <[e-mail]>]

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