Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A new approach for packet loss measurement of video streaming and its application

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Packet loss is of great importance as a metric that characterizes the network’s performance, and is crucial for video applications, congestion control and routing. Most of existing measurement tools can indicate the packet loss of network links instead of the actual packet loss of individual application. On the other hand, because occurrence of packet loss behavior is relatively rare and its duration is short, active measuring methods need to inject a large number of packets and run for a long time for reporting accurate estimates, which would introduce additional intrusiveness to the network and perturb user traffic. In this paper, we present a new packet loss estimation technique by making use of user_data field of video, which is less intrusive since it does not affect video playing and does not need to inject extra probing stream. It can also provide the packet loss detailed information of I,P,B frames. The accuracy of the algorithm has been evaluated with both simulations and experiments over real-world Internet paths. In addition, we analyze the video quality distortion caused by packet loss of different frame types, and a real-time video quality monitoring system is built.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akbari B, Rabiee HR, Ghanbari M (2008) Packet loss in peer-to-peer video streaming over the internet. Multimedia Systems 13:345–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Belyaev E, Vinel A, Jonsson M, Sjoberg K (2014) Live video streaming in IEEE 802.11 p vehicular networks: demonstration of an automotive surveillance application. IEEE INFOCOM Workshops 2014:131–132

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blanch C, de Groot H, van der Stok P (2005) Inventory of mpeg4 codecs. Information Society Technologies. BETSY IST-2004-004042. March 2005

  4. Dutta S, Dimitrova N (1996) Smart video streams: 101 uses of the user data field in MPEG. Conf Record Twenty-Ninth Asilomar Conf Signals Syst Comput 2:1462–1466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ellis M, Pezaros D, Kypraios T, Perkins C (2012) Modelling packet loss in RTP-based streaming video for residential users. Proceedings of the 37th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks. LCN 2012: 220–223

  6. Gu Y, Towsley D, Hollot C, Zhang H (2007) Congestion control for small buffer high speed networks. IEEE INFOCOM 2007:1037–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ha S, Rhee I, Lisong X (2008) CUBIC: a new tcp-friendly high-speed tcp variant. ACM SIGOPS 42(5):64–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hasib M, Schormans JA (2003) Limitations of passive and active measurement methods in packet networks, London Communications Symposium. LCS2003. September 2003

  9. Helix-server. (version 9.0) http://www.realnetworks.com/products-services/helix-server-proxy.aspx

  10. Hlavacs H, Hummel KA, Albl A, Frandl S et al (2005) Effects of wlan QoS degradation on streamed mpeg4 video quality, wireless systems and mobility in next generation internet. Lect Notes Comput Sci 3427:152–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hoffman D, Fernando G, Goyal V, Civanlar M (1998) Rtp payload format for mpeg1/mpeg2 video, RFC 2250, January.1998

  12. Hu Z, Zhang D, Gu L, Zhang Q (2003) Embedding method for packet loss self-measurement of video streaming. J Softw 24(9):2182–2195

    Google Scholar 

  13. Huang C, Salama P (2005) Error concealment for shape in MPEG-4 object-based video coding. IEEE Trans Image Process 14(4):389–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Iperf.(2008 version 2.0.3) http://iperf.sourceforge.net/

  15. ITU-T, Recommendation P.800. Methods for subjective determination of transmission quality. International Telecommunication Union- Telecommunication Standardisation Sector. August.1996

  16. Joskowicz J, López Ardao JC (2010) A general parametric model for perceptual video quality estimation. IEEE Int Workshop Tech Committee Commun Qual Reliab (CQR2010):1–6

  17. Huszák Á, Imre S(2010) Analysing GOP structure and packet loss effects on error propagation in MPEG-4 video streams. Proc. ISCCSP 2010(4):3–5

  18. Kikuchi Y, Nomura T, Fukunaga S, Matsui Y, Kimata H (2000) Rtp payload format for mpeg-4 audio/visual streams, IETF RFC 3016. November 2000

  19. Klaue J, Rathke B, Wolisz A (2003) EvalVid-a framework for video transmission and quality evaluation. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation. 2794:255–272

  20. Leopold K, Hellwagner H, Kropfberger M (2003) QCTVA-quality controlled temporal video adaptation. Proc SPIE - Int Soc Optic Eng 5242(1):163–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liang YJ, Apostolopoulos JG, Girod B (2003) Analysis of packet loss for compressed video: does burst-length matter? ICASSP 2003(5):684–687

    Google Scholar 

  22. Luo F (2007) Rate-distortion optimized rate shaping for streaming video and conversational video in multi-user in HSDPA system. Technical University of Munich. Master Thesis. November 2007

  23. Mahdavi J, Paxson V, Adams A, Mathis M (1998) Creating a scalable architecture for internet measurement. Proc INET 14(2):110–114

    Google Scholar 

  24. MAWI (2006)Working group traffic archive.. http://tracer.csl.sony.co.jp/mawi/200612301400.dump

  25. Mogul J, Deering S (1990) Path MTU discovery November. RFC 1191. November 1990

  26. OpenRTSP.(2010) OpenRTSP is a command-line program that can be used to open, stream, receive, and (optionally) record media streams http://www.live555.com/openRTSP/

  27. Pablo Rodriguez-Bocca(2008) Quality-centric design of peer-to-peer systems for live-video broadcasting. Université de Rennes 1, PHD thesis. April, 2008

  28. Padmalatha R, Sreedhar G (2010) A novel algorithm for improving the end-to-end active packet loss measurements in computer networks. Int J Comput Appl 6(1):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  29. Paxson V, Almes G, Mahdavi J, and Mathis M (1998) Framework for IP performance metrics, RFC 2330. May 1998

  30. Pinson M, Wolf S (2004) A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality. IEEE Trans Broadcast 50(3):312–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Planetlab.(2007) An open platform for developing, deploying,and accessing planetary-scale services http://www.planet-lab.org/

  32. Savadatti-Kamath S (2008) Video analysis and compression for surveillance applications. School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology. PHD thesis. December 2008

  33. Sommers J, Barford P, Duffield NG, Ron A (2008) A geometric approach to improving active packet loss measurement. IEEE/ACM Trans Networking 16(2):307–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tao S, Apostolopoulos JG, Guérin R (2008) Real-time monitoring of video quality in IP networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Networking 16(5):1052–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tcpdump (version: 4.5.1).http://www.tcpdump.org/

  36. Tcpreplay. (version 3.3.2).http://tcpreplay.synfin.net/trac/wiki/

  37. The MPEG-4 standard. (2001) International standard ISO/IEC 14496–2. Second edition. December.2001

  38. Van der Meer J, Mackie D, Swaminathan V, Singer D, Gentric P (2003) Rtp payload format for transport of mpeg-4 elementary streams. RFC 3640, November 2003

  39. Vinel A, Belyaev E, Lamotte O, Gabbouj M, Koucheryavy Y, Egiazarian K (2013) Video transmission over IEEE 802.11 p: real-world measurements. IEEE Int Conf Commun(ICC) 2013:505–509

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wan Z, Xiong N, Ghani N, Vasilakos AV, Zhou L (2014) Adaptive unequal protection for wireless video transmission over IEEE 802.11e networks. Multimedia Tool Appl 72(1):541–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wang Z, Wang W, Xia Y, Wan Z (2014) Visual quality assessment after network transmission tncorporating NS2 and evalvid. Sci World J 2014(1):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wenger S, Hannuksela M, Stockhammer T, Westerlund M (2005) Rtp payload format for h.264 video, RFC 3984 February 2005

  43. Wireshark. (version1.10.0).http://www.wireshark.org/download.html

  44. Wu M, Yu H, Liu B (2003) Data hiding in image and video: part II—designs and applications. IEEE Trans Image Process 12(6):696–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Ye D, Parlos AG (2007) Predictive path switching control for improving the quality of service in real-time applications. IEEE J Sel Top Sign Process 1(2):308–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. You F, Zhang W, Xiao J (2009) Packet loss pattern and parametric video quality model for IPTV, 8th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Computer and Information Science (ICIS) :824–828

  47. Zhang L, Gu Z, Xiaoxu L (2014) Training quality-aware filters for no-reference image quality assessment. IEEE Multimedia 21(4):67–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer & Information Technology, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, 030006, China

    Zhiguo Hu

  2. Department of Computer Science and Technology, TongJi University, ShangHai, 201804, China

    Zhiguo Hu & Qiqiang Zhang

Authors
  1. Zhiguo Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qiqiang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiguo Hu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, Z., Zhang, Q. A new approach for packet loss measurement of video streaming and its application. Multimed Tools Appl 77, 11589–11608 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3566-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3566-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation