Multicast Streaming for IPTV Content Distribution:

A Brief Survey
Seilendria A. Hadiwardoyo
Department of Computer Engineering (DISCA)
Universitat Politècnica de València
Email: [email protected]

Abstract—Several solutions are present for distributing stream- mentation of multicast techniques whether one that is built
ing services on IPTV. Contents that are delivered to the sub- in the network layer, in the application layer application, or
scribers, are expected to be distributed in a most effective way the combination between those two in order to support Large
without decreasing the Quality of Service in the user’s side. In the
scope of routing the packet delivered in IPTV systems, existing Scale Group Communication, like IPTV distribution.
solutions do not only include routing in the network layer, but The paper is organized as follows. The next section covers
also in the application layer, or even combining several layers. an overview of IPTV technology. Streaming solutions on
This paper presents a brief review of delivering IPTV contents providing IPTV service are provided in Section III. Section
proposals and discuss the challenges to be tackled in the future
IV presents the issues and challenges that are currently faced
of distributing IPTV contents.
Keywords—IP multicast, Application Layer Multicast, IPTV in distributing IPTV contents. Finally, in the last section we
conclude the paper with the future outlook of multicasting in
I. I NTRODUCTION IPTV service.

The demand on IPTV technology has increased and gained II. TV OVER IP N ETWORKS
more popularity recently [1]. In multimedia streaming tech-
nology, searching for the most reliable and efficient solution IPTV (Internet Protocol television) [4] is the delivery of pro-
to support such applications is receiving more attention, es- gramming by video stream encoded as a series of IP packets.
pecially when it comes to satisfy the users and to provide IPTV is distributed by a service provider and can be free or
many benefits for the providers. Multimedia streaming uses fee-based and able to deliver either live TV or stored video. It
a type of communication that fits a specific type of group can be bundled with other Internet Protocol services, including
communication where the information flow is from one source VoIP and high-speed Internet access. The content distribution
to many receivers, which is the multicast technique. is done using a network infrastructure, where the users receive
In order to support Group Communication, in which is audiovisual through their set-top box. Subscribers nowadays
involved in the multimedia streaming, the IP Multicast [2] demand rich content service, like audiovisual content, which
and application layer multicast [3] are offered as solutions. carries graphics and voice content at the same time. The IPTV
IP multicast is implemented through the routing protocol to market has developed quickly over the past years [5]. Telco
create information in routers that enables the dissemination of that run national backbones sees this technology as a new
information for a multicast group. Protocol for the manage- service to attract more customers. The IPTV that runs on the
ment of multicast groups is needed in the IP Multicast solution. IP network requires the transmission of large data amount.
Additionally, the type of address with different semantics than Nowadays, multicast technology is used to reduce load on the
unicast address is used since multicast addresses refer to mul- servers and overall bandwidth consumption as the transmission
tiple network interfaces rather than just one. Application layer of only one data packet wherever possible.
multicast (ALM) is built at the application level. ALM that IPTV encodes live TV streams in a series of IP packets
is a logical network, implement the multicast between nodes and delivers them to users through residential broadband
that constitute the network (even if the physical connections access networks. The rapid growth of IPTV has two key
between is not reliable). In ALM, in the network layer, the reasons. First, IPTV allows Internet service providers (ISPs)
nodes use unicast to communicate, but if we refer to the to strengthen their competitiveness by offering new services
application point of view, the communication is one-to-many such as triple-play (digital voice, TV, and data) and quadruple-
or many-to-many. play (digital voice, TV, data and mobile). Second, IPTV offers
These approaches to support IPTV application can have users much greater flexibility and interactivity and opens up
advantages and drawbacks. Whether it is in terms of resource opportunities for abroad range of new applications [6]. IPTV
or deployment on infrastructures. For a service that demands is unlike a regular broadcast TV service, but IPTV is a closed
a quality of service for the user and cost-effective for the system where the service is exclusive just like cable TV
providers, multicast streaming solutions should balance these service. The difference is that IPTV uses secure canal based
two perspectives. This paper covers a study of the imple- IP network.

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE
 multiple customer digital subscriber line (DSL) interfaces to a
high-speed digital communications channel using multiplexing
techniques. From DSLAM, user can have a DSL modem,
which provides access to the users as the costumers to gain
the benefits of the service from the providers. Then at the very
end, there is a set-top box, which is a device that decodes the
encoded video within IP packets, and gives a display to a
television screen. Act as an IPTV receiver; it is like a small
computer that provides a graphical interface with the auxiliary
system for user interactivity and representation.
There are some major features of IPTV technology, IPTV
as a broadcast service, Video on Demand service, web casting
server, and auxiliary system. Broadcast service has a feature
Fig. 1. IPTV Network like a traditional broadcast TV. In its servers, TV channels
are stored in order to be streamed out to a transmission
networks afterwards. VOD service is a service based on the
A. Characteristics of IPTV and Features users demand. Its feature is like any other video player features
like pause, fast forward and rewind controls. For its user
IPTV provides services that extend the features and function interface, there is an IPTV middleware. The auxiliary systems
of a direct broadcast satellite system via an IP Network. are like subscription management, billing digital management
IP technology is chosen by IPTV service providers, as it [7]. These functions allow the users to manage subscriptions,
facilitates a delivery of multiple consumer service in only a such as unsubscribe or making purchases.
single network. Voice (VoIP) and high-speed data access in
addition of IPTV can form a triple play, which is now being B. Quality of Service in IPTV
a trend in Telco companies. Total bandwidth requirements are Quality of Service (QoS), which is a major requirement for
determined by the amount of IPTV channels. Very high band- real-time IPTV service, is not an easy task to maintain. It is a
width is required to transmit these services. To stream IPTV critical factor for user satisfaction. We can remark that in IPTV
contents from the streaming server, multicast communication service, packet loss, packet reordering, packet duplication
is deployed, where each channel is only sent once to the and packet faults latency, and jitter are the parameter that
network so that it could be replicated to the end-users. should be considered [8]. Delay is mostly the essential factor
IPTV is distributed by converting video IP in a standard in delivering IPTV service. A longer delay may affect a
television signal. Set Top Box (STB) is a gateway to the worse QoS toward end-user experience. Packet losses will
switching video IP system. The main parts of IPTV are likely cause visible artifacts due to the high compression rates
core network, distribution network, access network, and home of MPEG encoded TV signals. QoS management is hard,
network. Core network is considered as the IP backbone because Internet has no centralized control and is in fact a
network. It will carry IPTV traffic from the super head end distributed system. The service provider may have no control,
to the video hub office. Video hub office is like a gateway to because the video traffic may level through some segments of
the access network, it is placed in the distribution network. Internet, in IPTV system, QoS is simplified. Service Provider
Access network is the network that connects the end-user to controls the IPTV system and also the Internet access of the
the core network. In the access network, there are DSLAMs users. It ensures the QoS of IPTV. In a home network, users
that bridge the user through their DSL modem. DSL modem may use other Internet applications. The traffic from other
is connected to the set-top box and a display device within the applications used by users is shared with the IPTV for the
home network. access bandwidth. It may happen to drop the packets and
The equipments that are used to build an IPTV Service degrade the video quality of IPTV if the total download rate
are shown on the Figure 1. In the video head-end, the exceeds the download bandwidth. IPTV can be processed with
source comes either directly from a camcorder that catch the higher priority if we implement the mechanism like Diffserv
audiovisual contents or from a satellite that retransmits any that can ensure the QoS of IPTV.
audiovisual contents. Then from the core network, it transports
the encoded content forwarded from the video head end to the III. S TREAMING S OLUTIONS
access network. VOD server, which is connected to the core Delivering mechanism for distributing multicast traffic is the
network, contains storage of video content. User can watch streaming solution for IPTV content delivery system. Multicast
a selected video content from the VOD server. Contents are is the method of delivering data to all hosts that have expressed
sent by unicast as it is sent individually from the server to interest by means of joining a specific group. The delivery
its user. Billing system server collects, formats, and stores method is one-to-many. There are two major types of solution
billing data of IPTV service. DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line for the Large Scale Group Communications, IP Multicast and
Access Multiplexer) [66] is a network device that connects Application Layer Multicast.

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE
A. Multicast Video Streaming 1) IP Multicast Protocols: In order to have multicast packet
delivery to interested receivers (those who have joined the
Video streaming is a technology that enables us to send
group) a multicast routing protocol must be active. The multi-
audio and video files in a real time. There is a tool to
cast routing protocol on the network layer has two categories,
support video streaming, which is a server that can store files
source based tree and shared tree. In source-based tree, sources
that can be downloaded, web browser plug-ins or stand-alone
use the shortest path to reach their host while in shared tree,
application that can be used by clients to access, codec that can
the sources first send their data to the core router to reach
be deployed to compress data, and transport protocol for an
their end users. In fact it is a reverse shortest path, because
optimum transfer. Several protocols like TCP that use a buffer
it is the shortest path from receivers to the source. It may
and RTP for stamping and source identification are used in
be the same in symmetric network links. The shortest path
video streaming [9].
algorithm in the graph theory includes both the one between
In streaming videos in IPTV, multicast protocol is used
the particular node pair and the one among all the nodes. The
for routing the streams, where a single data source transmits
shortest path problem [14] is one of the most fundamental and
user data to one or more than one receiver. The case of a
the most commonly encountered problems. It is modeled as
single receiver represents the special case of unicast. This
finding shortest path between two nodes in a weighted and
therefore constitutes an extension of unicast communication
directed network.
and is referred to as 1-to-n communication [10]. The sender
elect the only interested host to stream the packets. Sometimes
the case is not only one-to-many but can be many-to-many,
as the source might be multiple. The source in the multicast
is not burdened because it only transmits a single stream
of data. Unlike the unicast communication, that the packets
are sent one by one to its receivers, multicast replicates its
packets on the routers that connect the interested receivers.
Multicast is considerably observed as an improvement over
unicast communication.

B. Network Layer Multicast

Multicast routing in the network layer is called IP Multicast.
IP address is manipulated for routing purposes. The routing
of IP packets into a group of machines in which the diffusion
is selective, involves a multicast group of diffusion. The most
well known IP Multicast protocols are DVMRP [11], MOSPF Fig. 2. (a) Source-based tree and (b) Shared tree
[12], CBT [13], and PIM with Dense and Sparse Mode.
PIM-SM [] and CBT use a Rendezvous Point to organize As shown on Figure 2, there are two different mecha-
multicast tress, while others construct source-based trees. The nisms to transport packets from source to the receivers in IP
general principle of IP Multicast is a diffusion that occurs Multicast. In a source-based tree, the source points directly
within a group identified by an IP address (group address to the receivers, in the other hand, in a shared tree, there
of multicast, IP multicast addresses specify a ”set” of IP is a Rendezvous Point as the checkpoint where the packets
hosts that have joined a group and are interested in receiving are delivered and then redistributed in order to reach the
multicast traffic designated for that particular group). There receivers. The diffusion technique has two types, the dense
is a distinction between the sources and the members. The mode and the sparse mode. In the dense mode, the construction
hosts join groups by informing routers the groups that they of the distribution tree is by flood and prune. Pruning is a
would like to become member of. The multicast address is technique of triggering for supplying information about group
a destination address while the sources keeps their unicast membership and is used as a mechanism for addressing all
address. The multicast address for IPv4 is an IP address potential members throughout network. DVMRP [15], PIM-
class D (The group includes the addresses from 224.0.0.0 to DM [16], MOSPF [12] are the protocols using the dense
239.255.255.255) whereas in IPv6, the reserved addresses are mode diffusion. In the sparse mode, the construction of the
within FF00::/8. The protocol for the management of multicast distribution tree is by graft and prune. PIM-SM [17] and
group is IGMP. IP Multicast use IGMP in order to inform CBT [13] are the examples of protocols using sparse mode
router, which depends on the group. Group management is diffusion.
used for reporting the group membership information; group 2) Implementation of IP Multicast on IPTV: The most used
join and group leave information to the multicast routers on protocol for IPTV is multicast routing at the network level,
the subnet. In IP Multicast, the packets are replicated in the which is PIM-SM. PIM-SM build a unidirectional shared trees
router. Source only sends one packet to the groups, and then centered in a RP (Rendez-vous Point). It is effective when the
the routers replicate it towards its members. subscribers of multicast group are fewer. PIM-SM, is used

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE
to response the requirements of sparse multicast groups in are four categories of ALM: Mesh-based Multicast, Tree-
the Internet. It creates and maintains unidirectional multicast based Multicast, Multicast on top of structured P2P over-
tree based on Graft/Prune message. Multicast data packets lays, and Hierarchical Multicast. In the mesh-first approach,
originated at the root are forwarded only if they arrive on the group members first distributedly organize themselves into
same interface where the Graft message was sent. Multicast the overlay mesh topology [20], so that between each pair
routing tables stores the input interface for known multicast of members multiple paths exist topology, so that between
groups in the routers. PIM-SM has two types of distribution each pair of members multiple paths exist. Examples of these
trees: a source tree and a shared tree. The source tree is method approaches are Narada and Scatter Cast [21]. The tree-based
of transmitting the data packets from the source to hosts. This approach, the protocols distributedly construct a data delivery
is called Reverse Path Tree. The shared tree is a transmitted tree directly. Examples of this approach are BTP [22], HMTP
data packet over RP, which is the meeting place for sources [23], Yoid [24], ALMI [11], Overcast [5]. Other protocols
and hosts of multicast data. include building ALM on the top of the structured overlays
as an application. Examples of this approach are CAN [25],
C. Application Layer Multicast SCRIBE [26], Pastry [27], Bayeux [19], and Hypercast [28].
In another solution, namely hierarchical multicast, multicast
Application Layer Multicast (ALM) is another type of members into hierarchical structures, which is an imperative
routing solution. In ALM, the routing scheme is that the for obtaining better scaling characteristics. Examples of this
package is processed at the application layer, using only end- approach are Kudos [29] and NICE [3].
systems. Unicast tunneling is used to transfer the packets. 2) Implementation of ALM on IPTV: There are many imple-
ALM, also known as Overlay Multicast (OM) [18], Peer-to- mentations of application layer multicast for IPTV technology.
peer Multicast, or End System Multicast (ESM) [19], is the Most of the routing approaches implemented are the ones on
alternate approach responding the limited deployment of IP top of structured P2P (Peer-to-Peer) overlays. The protocols
Multicast, the best effort network layer multicast protocol. In that are implemented in P2P IPTV for instance is Donet
ALM, the end hosts are used to control group membership, [30]. Another approach includes mesh-pull system for P2P
multicast tree, and the data forwarding. Some protocols deploy streaming [31]. Based on [32], different from generic P2P live
the intermediate nodes, such as proxies or service nodes that streaming systems, IPTV system is usually operated and man-
can form a backbone overlay network. Outside the backbone aged by local commercial operator. It brings 3 characteristics:
overlay, the proxies can deliver data packets to end hosts
• Central node (Server) has high reliability because of
via multicast or unicast. We can distinguish ALM into two
specialized maintenance
categories, the tree-first and the mesh-first approach. No mesh
• Content provider will restrict scale of content distribution
topology is needed in this approach. Overlay Multicast is build
due to copyright reasons, so the size of single system is
on the top of a peer-to-peer network. It is based on overlay
not very large
network that connect every node in the multicast network.
• Commercial operator needs to monitor and manage play-
Some of the routers act as a checkpoint or a gateway.
back status of all clients
These characteristics make the design of P2P based IPTV live
streaming system different from generic P2P live streaming
systems. This system has good stability and low price even
though it is limited to smaller storage or weaker computing
ability.
D. Hybrid Multicast
Besides the solutions mentioned above, we do not neglect
other possible solutions, which is the mixing of the application
layer multicast and the IP multicast. Xcast [33] and Universal
Multicast [34] are one of other solutions that cannot be clas-
sified neither to IP Multicast nor Application Layer Multicast.
Xcast supports multicast sessions. It is done by adding all the
IP addresses in the destination field o f t he I P h eader, instead
of using a multicast address. Universal IP Multicast (UM) is a
Fig. 3. Overlay Used in ALM ubiquitous multicast delivery service that utilize IP multicast
wherever it is available. UM offers scalable and efficient end-
As we can see in Figure 3, overlay network is built in the host multicast support in places where native IP multicast does
top of a P2P network. Checkpoints that are connected as a not exist, and incorporates various infrastructure multicast
single network are connected to the end users. support automatically. This approach breaks the deadlock
1) ALM Routing Protocols: There are some application between application development and network deployment and
layer multicast routing protocols existed. Based on [], there utilizes existing multicast infrastructure support to improve

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE
both end user performance and bandwidth usage efficiency TABLE I
at the same time. C OMPARISON OF M ULTICAST ROUTING

Metrics IP ALM Hybrid

Infrastructure Cost High Low Moderate
Deployment Maintenance Easier Easier to
issues and more deploy and
flexible to maintain
Bandwidth Usage Low High Moderate
Efficiency in Efficient Less Efficient
content efficient
replication

ALM routes through unicast, so it is easier to deploy without

needing any router deployment. We dont have to reconfigure
any routers, as the lead actors in this streaming solution are the
end-users themselves. On the other hand, ALM is less efficient
in terms of bandwidth than IP Multicast. As the transmission
of the packet is similar to the unicast communication, the
packet is sent one by one on each specific host. So in this
case, Application Layer Multicast has a low efficiency. The
deployment also depends on the end system, the instability of
the end system might be one of drawbacks in ALM.
Projects have been done concerning the implementation of
Fig. 4. Hybrid Multicast Routing for IPTV [35]
the fusion between the IP Multicast and Application Layer
Multicast as well as the comparative study of these solutions.
A proposal for specific IPTV streaming solution using a
The comparison of the multicast distribution on the layers
hybrid system combining IP Multicast and P2P unicast has
has been evaluated as well [36] comparing IP multicast,
been done in order to enhance the bandwidth utilization, qual-
application layer multicast, and overlay multicast. Their work
ity and scalability aspects through simulation in [35]. Varying
has showed that overlay multicast could achieve comparable
number of channels streamed by multicast and the rest by P2P
performance to IP multicast and it is a good choice for large
unicast in which there is a distinction between the popular and
numbers of groups compared with the application layer one.
unpopular ones. That paper results demonstrate that while IP
And the study showed that overlay multicast could serve as a
multicast is always the most efficient, for channels with very
long-term solution. In a nutshell the comparison between net-
low popularity can be transmitted using P2P as the amount of
work layer, application layer, and hybrid multicast is presented
bandwidth would be the same as using more multicast groups.
in table I.
IV. O PEN I SSUES AND C HALLENGES Users in IPTV, or the audiences, subscribe to an IPTV
service provider and can have certain behavior. This behavior
We have briefly explained the multicast streaming solutions
can be taken into account for deploying routing solutions. The
to deliver IPTV content. Kinds of each solution are being
solutions should get the best delivery of contents depend on
showed and selected that suits the most for the implementation
the amount of users accessing the channels. The behavior is
of IPTV technology. The deployment of ALM is not always
based on channel holding time, channel surfing probability and
the best choice for the IPTV distribution. Even though it is
channel popularity and dynamics. We believe that researchers
an alternative to IP Multicast. It is not as efficient, also not as
in this area should adapt to these three behaviors on designing
robust as IP Multicast.
a routing solution.
IP Multicast is effective when it comes to reduce the load
on the server. Instead of multiple packets, the server needs V. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORKS
only to send one packet per link. The overall network load
consumption is reduced, as the transmission is only one copy. In this paper, we have covered the issues of distributing
This mechanism can also conserve bandwidth as a result. IPTV content using multicast techniques. Several solutions are
Although it looks like IP Multicast can be the best solution proposed whether in the network layer, application layer or a
to distribute IPTV services, the complexity in maintaining mix between both layers. The main goal is to deliver a cost-
routers of multicast group can be inconveniencing. IP multicast effective strategy distribute content based on user behavior.
needs a lot of routers to be deployed; router capabilities and As the service of delivering TV over IP networks is emerging,
maintenance can be an issue in this streaming solution. Thus, multicast techniques are implemented to ensure the satisfaction
IP multicast burdens the infrastructure although it is efficient. of its subscribers.
ALM is less costly because it does not need any routers, QoS should be guaranteed by television providers along
as the infrastructure cost is not as high as IP Multicast. with efficient resource utilization. Network layer multicast has

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE
its advantages in terms of network resource utilization. How- [17] A. Adams, J. Nicholas, and W. Siadak, “Protocol independent multicast-
ever, this multicast technique has some issues on reliability dense mode (pim-dm): Protocol specification (revised),” RFC 3973,
Tech. Rep., 2004.
and security. On the other hand, application layer multicast [18] S. Y. Shi and J. S. Turner, “Routing in overlay multicast networks,”
has longer delays although it may offer efficient deployment in INFOCOM 2002. Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE
than the network layer does. A good solution is the hybrid Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE, vol. 3.
IEEE, 2002, pp. 1200–1208.
multicast, which combines the facilities of application layer [19] L. Xing-feng, Y. Bao-ping, and L. Wan-ming, “Overlay multicast
and network layer multicast. Interesting open issues that can network optimization and simulation based on narada protocol,” in
be tackled in the future would be proposing a hybrid solution Advanced Communication Technology, 2008. ICACT 2008. 10th Inter-
national Conference on, vol. 3. IEEE, 2008, pp. 2215–2220.
combining several layers that can adapt several user behaviors [20] M. Alkubeily, H. Bettahar, and A. Bouabdallah, “A new application-
without losing its QoS and to conform user’s satisfaction. level multicast technique for stable, robust and efficient overlay tree
construction,” Computer Networks, vol. 55, no. 15, pp. 3332–3350, 2011.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT [21] Y. Chawathe, “Scattercast: an adaptable broadcast distribution frame-
work,” Multimedia Systems, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 104–118, 2003.
This project was partially supported by the Centro Algoritmi [22] D. A. Helder and S. Jamin, “End-host multicast communication using
switch-trees protocols,” in Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2002. 2nd
Universidade do Minho, Portugal and Universite de Bretagne- IEEE/ACM International Symposium on. IEEE, 2002, pp. 419–419.
Sud, France. Special thanks to Alexandre Santos, Antonio [23] B. Zhang, S. Jamin, and L. Zhang, “Host multicast: A framework for
Costa, Maria-Joao Nicolau, and Frédéric Guidec for their delivering multicast to end users,” in INFOCOM 2002. Twenty-First
Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications
constructing advice and direction on the project. Societies. Proceedings. IEEE, vol. 3. IEEE, 2002, pp. 1366–1375.
[24] P. Francis, “Yoid: Extending the internet multicast architecture,” 2000.
R EFERENCES [25] S. Ratnasamy, P. Francis, M. Handley, R. Karp, and S. Shenker, A
scalable content-addressable network. ACM, 2001, vol. 31, no. 4.
[1] T. Hoßfeld and K. Leibnitz, “A qualitative measurement survey of pop- [26] M. Castro, P. Druschel, A.-M. Kermarrec, and A. I. Rowstron, “Scribe: A
ular internet-based iptv systems,” in Communications and Electronics, large-scale and decentralized application-level multicast infrastructure,”
2008. ICCE 2008. Second International Conference on. IEEE, 2008, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in communications, vol. 20, no. 8, pp.
pp. 156–161. 1489–1499, 2002.
[2] S. Deering, “Host extensions for ip multicasting, aug 1989,” RFC1112, [27] A. Rowstron and P. Druschel, “Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object
1997. location, and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems,” in IFIP/ACM
[3] S. Banerjee, B. Bhattacharjee, and C. Kommareddy, Scalable application International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms and Open
layer multicast. ACM, 2002, vol. 32, no. 4. Distributed Processing. Springer, 2001, pp. 329–350.
[4] M. Cha, P. Rodriguez, J. Crowcroft, S. Moon, and X. Amatriain, [28] J. Liebeherr and T. K. Beam, “Hypercast: A protocol for maintaining
“Watching television over an ip network,” in Proceedings of the 8th multicast group members in a logical hypercube topology,” in Interna-
ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. ACM, 2008, tional Workshop on Networked Group Communication. Springer, 1999,
pp. 71–84. pp. 72–89.
[5] J. Jannotti, D. K. Gifford, K. L. Johnson, M. F. Kaashoek et al., [29] S. Jain, R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, G. Borriello, and S. Gribble,
“Overcast: reliable multicasting with on overlay network,” in Proceed- “Scalable self-organizing overlays,” Technical report UW-CSE 02-02-
ings of the 4th Conference on Symposium on Operating System Design 02, University of Washington, Tech. Rep., 2002.
Implementation-Volume 4. USENIX Association, 2000, p. 14. [30] X. Zhang, J. Liu, B. Li, and Y.-S. Yum, “Coolstreaming/donet: A
[6] A. A. Mahimkar, Z. Ge, A. Shaikh, J. Wang, J. Yates, Y. Zhang, data-driven overlay network for peer-to-peer live media streaming,” in
and Q. Zhao, “Towards automated performance diagnosis in a large INFOCOM 2005. 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer
iptv network,” in ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, and Communications Societies. Proceedings IEEE, vol. 3. IEEE, 2005,
vol. 39, no. 4. ACM, 2009, pp. 231–242. pp. 2102–2111.
[7] M. T. Islam and A. Hoque, “Study of reliable multicast for iptv service,” [31] X. Hei, Y. Liu, and K. W. Ross, “Iptv over p2p streaming networks: the
2008. mesh-pull approach,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 46, no. 2,
[8] D. Qiu, “On the qos of iptv and its effects on home networks,” in 2008.
Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, 2008. CCNC [32] C. Zhu and D. Ye, “Clear p2p iptv live streaming system for set-top box
2008. 5th IEEE. IEEE, 2008, pp. 834–838. clients,” in Computer and Information Technology, 2007. CIT 2007. 7th
[9] D. Wu, Y. T. Hou, W. Zhu, Y.-Q. Zhang, and J. M. Peha, “Streaming IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2007, pp. 539–544.
video over the internet: approaches and directions,” IEEE Transactions [33] R. Boivie, N. Feldman, Y. Imai, W. Livens, D. Ooms, and O. Pari-
on circuits and systems for video technology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 282–300, daens, “Explicit multicast (xcast) concepts and options,” The Internet
2001. Engineering Task Force, Request for Comments, vol. 5058, pp. 1–35,
[10] R. Wittmann and M. Zitterbart, Multicast Communication: Protocols, 2007.
Programming, & Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, 2000. [34] B. Zhang, W. Wang, S. Jamin, D. Massey, and L. Zhang, “Universal
[11] D. E. Pendarakis, S. Shi, D. C. Verma, and M. Waldvogel, “Almi: An ip multicast delivery,” Computer Networks, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 781–806,
application level multicast infrastructure.” in USITS, vol. 1, 2001, pp. 2006.
5–5. [35] A. Bikfalvi, J. Garcı́a-Reinoso, I. Vidal, F. Valera, and A. Azcorra, “P2p
[12] J. Moy, “Multicast routing extensions for ospf,” Communications of the vs. ip multicast: Comparing approaches to iptv streaming based on tv
ACM, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 61–67, 1994. channel popularity,” Computer Networks, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1310–1325,
[13] T. Ballardie, P. Francis, and J. Crowcroft, “Core based trees (cbt),” 2011.
in ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 23, no. 4. [36] L. Lao, J.-H. Cui, M. Gerla, and D. Maggiorini, “A comparative study of
ACM, 1993, pp. 85–95. multicast protocols: top, bottom, or in the middle?” in INFOCOM 2005.
[14] Y. Wen, W. Zang, and C. Li, “A novel shortest path method based on 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communica-
heuristic algorithm,” in Machine Vision and Human-Machine Interface tions Societies. Proceedings IEEE, vol. 4. IEEE, 2005, pp. 2809–2814.
(MVHI), 2010 International Conference on. IEEE, 2010, pp. 545–548.
[15] S. Deering, C. Partridge, and D. Waitzman, “Distance vector multicast
routing protocol,” RFC, Tech. Rep., 1988.
[16] B. Fenner, M. Handley, I. Kouvelas, and H. Holbrook, “Protocol
independent multicast-sparse mode (pim-sm): Protocol specification
(revised),” RFC 4601, http://www. rfc-editor. org/pdfrfc/rfc4601. txt. pdf,
Tech. Rep., 2006.

978-1-5386-2708-2/17/$31.00©2017/IEEE