Measuring Effect of Packet Reordering on Quality of Experience (QoE) in Video Streaming
- 46 Downloads
Video streaming is an important part of the Internet and it is widely used for IPTV, video conferencing and E-learning. The quality of experience (QoE) of users about the video contents is important for service providers to improve services and provide quality of service to end users. The video quality is affected by packet reordering, delay and loss in the network, which degrades the QoE of end users. In this paper, we conducted several experiments on video streaming creating artificial packet reorder to measure user stratification level of video quality as well as acceptable network level for end users. We used NetEm tool for creating artificial packet reorder in video streaming, recording and playing videos for participants for perception, and investigated the QoE of different packet reorder percentage. From our experiments, we found that QoE of users is decreased when video quality is reordered due to network traffic. This work will help content providers to provide QoE to users based on service level agreements.
KeywordsQuality of experience (QoE) Quality of service (QoS) Packet reordering Video streaming Perception
The work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Grant No. 2017YB0801801, the National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 61472108. Professor Hui He is corresponding author.
- 1.Tinta, S. P., Mohr, A. E., & Wong, J. L. (2009). Characterizing end-to-end packet reordering with UDP traffic. In IEEE symposium on computers and communications, 2009. ISCC 2009 (pp. 321–324).Google Scholar
- 3.Zhou, X., & Van Mieghem, P. (2004). Reordering of IP packets in Internet. In International workshop on passive and active network measurement (pp. 237–246).Google Scholar
- 4.Asano, A., Nishiyama, H., & Kato, N. (2010). The effect of packet reordering and encrypted traffic on streaming content leakage detection. In 2010 Proceedings of 19th international conference on computer communications and networks.Google Scholar
- 5.Accessed on Nov 5, 2016, from https://paperpicker.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/packet-reordering/.
- 8.Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M., & Khan, A., (2016). Assessing effect of cloud distance on end user’s quality of experience (QoE). In 2016 2nd IEEE international conference on computer and communications (ICCC) (pp. 500–505).Google Scholar
- 10.Laghari, A. A., Sadhayo, I. H., & Channa, M. I. (2015). Enhanced autonomic networking management architecture (Enama). Engineering, Science & Technology, 14(1), 9–13.Google Scholar
- 11.Le Callet, P., Möller, S., & Perkis, A., (2013). Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience (2012). In European network on quality of experience in multimedia systems and services (COST Action IC 1003).Google Scholar
- 12.Laghari, A. A., Laghari, K. U. R., Channa, M. I., & Falk, T. H., (2012). QON: Quality of experience (QoE) framework for network services. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on software technology and engineering (ICSTE’12).Google Scholar
- 14.Laghari, A. A., Channa, M. I., Laghari, K. R., Aman, M., & Memon, M. (2013). EQOM: enhanced quality of experience (QoE) framework for multimedia services. UACEE International Journal of Computer Science and Its Applications, 3(1), 85–89.Google Scholar
- 15.Timmerer, C., Maiero, M., & Rainer, B. (2016). Which adaptation logic? An objective and subjective performance evaluation of http-based adaptive media streaming systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.00341.
- 16.Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M., & Khan, A., (2017). Impact of storage of mobile on quality of experience (QoE) at user level accessing cloud. In 2017 IEEE 9th international conference on communication software and networks (ICCSN) (pp. 1402–1409).Google Scholar
- 17.NetEm. Accessed Nov 5, 2016, from https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/netEm.
- 18.Laghari, A. A., Dilshad, A., & Memon, M. S. (2012). Merging quality of experience with autonomic networks. Sindh University Research Journal (SURJ) (Science Series), 44(2AB), 69–74.Google Scholar
- 19.Wang, L., & Gelenbe, E. (2015). Demonstrating voice over an autonomic network. In IEEE international conference on autonomic computing (ICAC) (pp. 139–140).Google Scholar
- 20.Yohannes, D., & Mali, D. (2016). Effect of delay, packet loss, packet duplication and packet reordering on voice communication quality over WLan. Technia, 8(2), 1071.Google Scholar
- 21.Laghari, K. R., Issa, O., Speranza, F., & Falk, T. H. (2012). Quality-of-experience perception for video streaming services: Preliminary subjective and objective results. In Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC) (pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
- 22.Hemminger, S. (2005). Network emulation with NetEm. In Linux conf au (pp. 18–23).Google Scholar
- 23.VLC player. http://www.videolan.org/vlc/. Accessed 24 March 2018.
- 24.BT, R.I.R. (2002). Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures.Google Scholar
- 25.ITU-T RECOMMENDATION, P. (1999). Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications.Google Scholar