1 / 6

RMCAT Video Quality Evaluation and Double Bottleneck Test Scenario

RMCAT Video Quality Evaluation and Double Bottleneck Test Scenario. G. Van der Auwera, M. Coban draft-vanderauwera-rmcat-video-quality-00 IETF 88, Vancouver, Canada Nov. 3-8, 2013. Introduction. Part 1: Proposes video quality test scenarios

sema
Télécharger la présentation

RMCAT Video Quality Evaluation and Double Bottleneck Test Scenario

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RMCAT Video Quality Evaluation and Double Bottleneck Test Scenario G. Van der Auwera, M. Coban draft-vanderauwera-rmcat-video-quality-00 IETF 88, Vancouver, Canada Nov. 3-8, 2013

  2. Introduction • Part 1: Proposes video quality test scenarios • Impact of congestion control on media streams is important in real-world deployments • It is proposed that RMCAT solutions are implemented in a state-of-the-art video coding and communication framework to provide proof-of-concept evidence • The purpose is to demonstrate that implementations of the congestion control solutions are feasible and that the video quality behavior under the defined test scenarios is as desired • Part 2: “Double bottleneck” test scenario to provide insight into the rate allocation behavior of congestion controller • Asymmetric flow conditions

  3. Video Quality Test Scenarios: Introduction • Purpose is to verify or inspect the video quality of congestion control solutions • By defining “desired or expected” quality behaviors for each test • This means there should be no objectionable video quality problems • Subjective quality evaluation by expert viewer panel • “Expert viewer ” means that video quality is understood as well as the various test scenarios • Result is “pass or fail” • Meaning that undesired video quality behaviors result in fail outcome • Quality problems (if any) should be carefully documented • Intention is not to compare congestion control methods against each other • Result is used in addition to network traffic evaluation results • Video conferencing/telephony test sequences can be provided

  4. Video Quality Test Scenarios • Scenario A • Single bottleneck link and a single media flow • Purpose is to evaluate video quality under congestion control startup and varying bottleneck bandwidth behaviors • Scenario B • Single bottleneck link and two media flows with different start times • Purpose is to evaluate video quality under the congestion control behavior when a second competing flow joins and leaves the bottleneck link • Scenario C • Single bottleneck link with background traffic • Purpose is to evaluate video quality under congestion control behavior in the presence of bursty TCP flows

  5. Part 2: Double Bottleneck Test Scenario • One media flow encounters two bottleneck links (two queues) that are each shared with a second but different flow • The purpose is to evaluate the congestion control's rate distribution among the flows under these asymmetric conditions B A C

  6. Summary • Proposed to perform video quality evaluation in addition to network traffic evaluations • Proposed to add “double bottleneck” test scenario to network traffic evaluation Thank you! Questions?

More Related