skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Inferring Streaming Video Quality from Encrypted Traffic: Practical Models and Deployment Experience

Published:17 December 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Inferring the quality of streaming video applications is important for Internet service providers, but the fact that most video streams are encrypted makes it difficult to do so. We develop models that infer quality metrics (\ie, startup delay and resolution) for encrypted streaming video services. Our paper builds on previous work, but extends it in several ways. First, the models work in deployment settings where the video sessions and segments must be identified from a mix of traffic and the time precision of the collected traffic statistics is more coarse (\eg, due to aggregation). Second, we develop a single composite model that works for a range of different services (\ie, Netflix, YouTube, Amazon, and Twitch), as opposed to just a single service. Third, unlike many previous models, our models perform predictions at finer granularity (\eg, the precise startup delay instead of just detecting short versus long delays) allowing to draw better conclusions on the ongoing streaming quality. Fourth, we demonstrate the models are practical through a 16-month deployment in 66 homes and provide new insights about the relationships between Internet "speed'' and the quality of the corresponding video streams, for a variety of services; we find that higher speeds provide only minimal improvements to startup delay and resolution.

References

  1. 2019. Labeled video sessions dataset. https://nm-public-data.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/dataset/all_traffic_time_10. pkl.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2019. Video Collection Tools. https://github.com/inria-muse/video_collection.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Anne Aaron, Z Li, M Manohara, J De Cock, and D Ronca. 2015. Per-title encode optimization. The Netflix Techblog (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Adnan Ahmed, Zubair Shafiq, Harkeerat Bedi, and Amir Khakpour. 2017. Suffering from buffering? Detecting QoE impairments in live video streams. In International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP). Toronto, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. GSM Association. 2015. Network Management of Encrypted Traffic: Version 1.0. https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/wpcontent/ uploads/WWG-04-v1-0.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Balachandran, V. Sekar, A. Akella, S. Seshan, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. 2012. A quest for an internet video quality-ofexperience metric. In HotNets. Redmond, WA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Athula Balachandran, Vyas Sekar, Aditya Akella, Srinivasan Seshan, Ion Stoica, and Hui Zhang. 2013. Developing a predictive model of quality of experience for internet video. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 43, 4 (2013), 339--350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Leo Breiman. 2017. Classification and regression trees. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Francesco Bronzino, Paul Schmitt, Sara Ayoubi, Nick Feamster, Renata Teixeira, Sarah Wasserman, and Srikanth Sundaresan. 2019. Lightweight, General Inference of Streaming Video Quality from Encrypted Traffic. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.05800v1 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Martin Brown. 2006. Traffic Control HOWTO. http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Traffic-Control-HOWTO/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrome web 2018. Chrome webRequest API. https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/webRequest.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chrome1080 2018. netflix-1080p - Chrome extension to play Netflix in 1080p and 5.1. https://github.com/truedread/ netflix-1080p.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Chromedriver 2018. ChromeDriver -WebDriver for Chrome. https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/chromedriver/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Cisco 2017. Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Methodology, 2016--2021. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/ solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/complete-white-paper-c11--481360.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Giorgos Dimopoulos, Ilias Leontiadis, Pere Barlet-Ros, and Konstantina Papagiannaki. 2016. Measuring video QoE from encrypted traffic. In Proceedings of the 2016 Internet Measurement Conference. ACM, 513--526.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Florin Dobrian, Vyas Sekar, Asad Awan, Ion Stoica, Dilip Joseph, Aditya Ganjam, Jibin Zhan, and Hui Zhang. 2011. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 41, 4 (2011), 362--373.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Driving Engagement 2017. Driving Engagement for Online Video. http://events.digitallyspeaking.com/akamai/ mddec10/post.html?hash=ZDlBSGhsMXBidnJ3RXNWSW5mSE1HZz09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Keith Dyer. 2015. How encryption threatens mobile operators, and what they can do about it. http://the-mobilenetwork. com/2015/01/how-encryption-threatens-mobile-operators-and-what-they-can-do-about-it/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Craig Gutterman, Katherine Guo, Sarthak Arora, Xiaoyang Wang, Les Wu, Ethan Katz-Bassett, and Gil Zussman. 2019. Requet: Real-Time QoE Detection for Encrypted YouTube Traffic. In ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems (MMSys '19). Amherst, MA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Tobias Hoßfeld, Michael Seufert, Christian Sieber, and Thomas Zinner. 2014. Assessing effect sizes of influence factors towards a QoE model for HTTP adaptive streaming. In Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX). Singapore.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. T. Huang, R. Johari, N. McKeown, M. Trunnell, and M. Watson. 2014. A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: Evidence from a large video streaming service. In ACM SIGCOMM. Chicago, IL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. ITU 2012. ITU Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. Recommendation ITU-R BT.500--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Vengatanathan Krishnamoorthi, Niklas Carlsson, Emir Halepovic, and Eric Petajan. 2017. BUFFEST: Predicting Buffer Conditions and Real-time Requirements of HTTP(S) Adaptive Streaming Clients. In MMSys'17. Taipei, Taiwan.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. S Shunmuga Krishnan and Ramesh K Sitaraman. 2013. Video stream quality impacts viewer behavior: inferring causality using quasi-experimental designs. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 21, 6 (2013), 2001--2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Tarun Mangla, Emir Halepovic, Mostafa Ammar, and Ellen Zegura. 2017. MIMIC: Using passive network measurements to estimate HTTP-based adaptive video QoE metrics. In Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA). Dublin, Ireland.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Tarun Mangla, Emir Halepovic, Mostafa Ammar, and Ellen Zegura. 2018. eMIMIC: Estimating HTTP-based Video QoE Metrics from Encrypted Network Traffic. In Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA). Vienna, Austria.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. M. Hammad Mazhar and Zubair Shafiq. 2018. Real-time Video Quality of Experience Monitoring for HTTPS and QUIC. In INFOCOM. Honolulu, HI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Abhijit Mondal, Satadal Sengupta, Bachu Rikith Reddy, MJV Koundinya, Chander Govindarajan, Pradipta De, Niloy Ganguly, and Sandip Chakraborty. 2017. Candid with YouTube: Adaptive Streaming Behavior and Implications on Data Consumption. In NOSSDAV'17. Taipei, Taiwan.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Openwave Mobility. 2018. Mobile Video Index. https://landing.owmobility.com/mobile-video-index/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2825--2830.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. QUIC Draft 2018. QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport. https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-quictransport- 09.txt.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Sandvine. 2015. Global Internet Phenomena Spotlight: Encrypted Internet Traffic. https://www.sandvine.com/hubfs/ downloads/archive/global-internet-phenomena-spotlight-encrypted-internet-traffic.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Sandvine. 2015. Internet Traffic Classification: A Sandvine Technology Showcase. https://www.sandvine.com/hubfs/ downloads/archive/technology-showcase-internet-traffic-classification.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Iraj Sodagar. 2011. The MPEG-DASH standard for multimedia streaming over the internet. IEEE MultiMedia 18, 4 (2011), 62--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. T. Stockhammer. 2011. Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP: standards and design principles. In ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems (MMSys '11). San Jose, CA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Baochen Sun, Jiashi Feng, and Kate Saenko. 2016. Return of frustratingly easy domain adaptation. In Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Tcpdump 2017. tcpdump - dump traffic on a network. https://www.tcpdump.org/manpages/tcpdump.1.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. TheWall Street Journal 2019. The Truth About Faster Internet: It's NotWorth It. https://www.wsj.com/graphics/fasterinternet- not-worth-it/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Martino Trevisan, Idilio Drago, and Marco Mellia. 2016. Impact of Access Speed on Adaptive Video Streaming Quality: A Passive Perspective. In Proceedings of the 2016 Workshop on QoE-based Analysis and Management of Data Communication Networks (Internet-QoE '16). Florianopolis, Brazil.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Xiaoqi Yin, Abhishek Jindal, Vyas Sekar, and Bruno Sinopoli. 2015. A control-theoretic approach for dynamic adaptive video streaming over HTTP. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 45, 4 (2015), 325--338.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Youtube API 2018. YouTube Player API Reference for iframe Embeds. https://developers.google.com/youtube/iframe_ api_reference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Inferring Streaming Video Quality from Encrypted Traffic: Practical Models and Deployment Experience

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems
            Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems  Volume 3, Issue 3
            SIGMETRICS
            December 2019
            525 pages
            EISSN:2476-1249
            DOI:10.1145/3376928
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2019 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 17 December 2019
            Published in pomacs Volume 3, Issue 3

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader