IP packet interleaving for UDP bursty losses

Botta, Alessio; Pescapè, Antonio

doi:10.1016/j.jss.2015.07.048

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interleaving can significantly improve the quality with which we perceive an audio stream [2,27]. For example, over the last few years, it has been widely adopted for mitigating the bursty losses [6,8] and in particular in VoIP streaming transmissions [7].…”

Section: Interleavingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Packet loss recovery in audio multimedia streaming by using compressive sensing

Ciaramella¹,

Giunta²

2016

IET Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to introduce a new scheme, based on a compressive sampling technique, for the reconstruction of lost data in multimedia streaming. The audio streaming data are encapsulated in different packets, at the sender, by using an interleaving technique. The compressive sampling technique is used to recover audio information in case of lost packets, at the receiver. Experimental results are presented for speech and musical audio signals which illustrate the performances and the capabilities of the proposed methodology

show abstract

Section: Interleavingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Voice over internet protocol (VoIP) systems, for example, have become a basic tool on modern Internet phones. However, a high percentage of packet loss can often make speech unintelligible [6][7][8]. For this reason, VoIP applications regularly incorporate a packet loss recovering or concealment mechanism (packet loss concealment (PLC)).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Packet loss recovery in audio multimedia streaming by using compressive sensing

Ciaramella¹,

Giunta²

2016

IET Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, for users with the same Internet Service Provider (ISP) and service plan, one user consistently had greater throughput of several hundred kB that was probably due to packet losses. The authors of [37] tested their interleaving scheme on the PlanetLab network testbed in respect to the wired Internet and over satellite links. In the wired Internet experiments, 45% of flows experienced no losses, while 10% of packet flows experienced over 50% packet losses.…”

Section: Comparison Across Channel Codesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Video over DSL with LDGM Codes for Interactive Applications

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) network access is subject to error bursts, which, for interactive video, can introduce unacceptable latencies if video packets need to be re-sent. If the video packets are protected against errors with Forward Error Correction (FEC), calculation of the application-layer channel codes themselves may also introduce additional latency. This paper proposes Low-Density Generator Matrix (LDGM) codes rather than other popular codes because they are more suitable for interactive video streaming, not only for their computational simplicity but also for their licensing advantage. The paper demonstrates that a reduction of up to 4 dB in video distortion is achievable with LDGM Application Layer (AL) FEC. In addition, an extension to the LDGM scheme is demonstrated, which works by rearranging the columns of the parity check matrix so as to make it even more resilient to burst errors. Telemedicine and video conferencing are typical target applications.

show abstract

“…Typically, the number of redundant data items added to the source block determines the data recovery capacity (ie, the number of lost source data items that can be recovered). [12][13][14][15][16][17] Through the SCIT process, the burst lost packets are dispersed among different coding blocks. In byte-level FEC, the source bits and FEC redundant bits are packetized into transport packets.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the SCIT FEC scheme, the interleaving buffer gathers several blocks of packets into a transmission group (where the number of blocks is referred to as the interleaving degree), and packets from different coding blocks are then transmitted sequentially. [12][13][14][15][16][17] Through the SCIT process, the burst lost packets are dispersed among different coding blocks. Thus, provided that the number of lost packets is less than the number of redundant packets in a coding block, the FEC decoder can still recover the lost source packets at the receiver side.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interleaved coding and sequential transmission scheme for packet‐level forward error correction over burst loss channels

Weng

Shih

Chou

2017

Int J Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Burst packet loss is a common problem over wired and wireless networks and leads to a significant reduction in the performance of packet-level forward error correction (FEC) schemes used to recover packet losses during transmission. Traditional FEC interleaving methods adopt the sequential coding-interleaved transmission (SCIT) process to encode the FEC packets sequentially and reorder the packet transmission sequence. Consequently, the burst loss effect can be mitigated at the expense of an increased end-to-end delay. Alternatively, the reversed interleaving scheme, namely, interleaved coding-sequential transmission (ICST), performs FEC coding in an interleaved manner and transmits the packets sequentially based on their generation order in the application. In this study, the analytical FEC model is constructed to evaluate the performance of the SCIT and ICST schemes. From the analysis results, it can be observed that the interleaving delay of ICST FEC is reduced by transmitting the source packets immediately as they arrive from the application. Accordingly, an Enhanced ICST scheme is further proposed to trade the saved interleaving time for a greater interleaving capacity, and the corresponding packet loss rate can be minimized under a given delay constraint. The simulation results show that the Enhanced ICST scheme achieves a lower packet loss rate and a higher peak signal-to-noise-ratio than the traditional SCIT and ICST schemes for video streaming applications.KEYWORDS burst loss channel, forward error correction, interleaved coding, interleaving delay, sequential transmission | INTRODUCTIONThe data delivery quality over the Internet is readily affected by transmission channel dynamics, such as delays and packet loss. Thus, data recovery schemes such as forward error correction (FEC) are essential in achieving a robust data transmission performance. 1,2 The basic principle of FEC is to group the source data items into blocks of a predetermined size at the sender end, and then add a certain number of redundant data items to each block such that if losses occur during transmission, the source data items can still be reconstructed at the receiving end. Typically, the number of redundant data items added to the source block determines the data recovery capacity (ie, the number of lost source data items that can be recovered). In general, FEC schemes operate at either the byte (ie, symbol) level or the packet level. In byte-level FEC, the source bits and FEC redundant bits are packetized into transport packets. 3-5 By contrast, in packet-level FEC, the source packets and FEC packets are constructed separately so as to provide strong protection against packet losses. 6-8 In other words, byte-level FEC and packet-level FEC are designed mainly to recover transmission errors within the packet and occasional packet losses, respectively. In the event of burst packet losses, however,

show abstract

IP packet interleaving for UDP bursty losses

Cited by 9 publications

References 38 publications

Packet loss recovery in audio multimedia streaming by using compressive sensing

Packet loss recovery in audio multimedia streaming by using compressive sensing

Video over DSL with LDGM Codes for Interactive Applications

Interleaved coding and sequential transmission scheme for packet‐level forward error correction over burst loss channels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About