whitepaper_optimizingmobilevideo

8/7/2019 WhitePaper_OptimizingMobileVideo

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/whitepaperoptimizingmobilevideo 1/12

Optimizing Mobile Video How to Use Mobile Video Gateways to Conserve Network Bandwidth, Reduce Operating Costs,

Increase Simultaneous Users, and Improve Quality of Video Experience

Ortiva Wireless

July 2010

White Paper



White Paper – Optimizing Mobile Video

Copyright ©2010 Ortiva Wireless 2

Optimizing Mobile Video

How to Use Mobile Video Gateways to Conserve Network Bandwidth, Reduce Operating Costs,

Increase Simultaneous Users, and Improve Quality of Video Experience

Table of Contents

Executive Overview ................................................................................................................................... 3

Mobile Video Trends ................................................................................................................................. 3

Mobile Video Challenges .......................................................................................................................... 4

History of Mobile Video Solutions ............................................................................................................ 7

Solution Overview ‐ Mobile Video Optimization ...................................................................................... 7

Video Optimization Gateway .................................................................................................................... 8

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 12

Ortiva Wireless – Mobile Video Optimization Experts ........................................................................... 12

Copyright©2010 Ortiva Wireless, Inc. All rights reserved. July 2010.





Executive Overview Mobile video use is growing exponentially. Cisco forecasts mobile video data traffic will grow at a

compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 131% between 2009 and 2014.1 With the growth of mobile

video comes heavy demand on mobile network bandwidth because current video delivery methods,

designed for fixed wireline networks, are not optimized for wireless networks. Adding radio bandwidth

capacity with radio expansions or 4G does not solve the challenge of improving mobile video quality of

experience. Radio Frequency (RF) bandwidth variability and unpredictability persists, affecting

throughput. In fact, 4G aggravates mobile video quality of experience because of the greater variability

(the “peaks and valleys”) of 4G bandwidth, compared with 3G. 4G does nothing to reduce unnecessary

bandwidth consumption and its costs.

This inefficient delivery of mobile video strains and congests radio access networks (RAN) and backhaul,

raising network operational expenses (OPEX) and capital expenses (CAPEX) while degrading the

subscriber quality of experience.

But

there

is

good

news

for

mobile

network

planners

and

operators.

Using

video

optimization

gateways,

Mobile Network Operators (MNO) can improve the mobile video user experience while serving fewer

bits over wireless networks. Video optimization gateways can conservatively save MNOs 30% to 50% in

RAN and backhaul demand, allowing MNOs to save OPEX and defer CAPEX. At the same time, MNOs can

simplify management of the complex ecosystem of video and device protocols and standards.

Unlike text‐based mobile data, mobile video requires specialized optimization techniques. The purpose

of this white paper is to explain the challenges and importance of mobile video optimization.

Mobile Video Trends Mobile video is booming. By 2014, mobile video will represent two‐thirds of all mobile data traffic.

2

Several catalysts are driving mobile video growth.

• Penetration of Multimedia Devices. Subscribers are adopting netbooks, laptops, and

smartphones with higher resolution screens, better CPUs, and longer battery life. These

multimedia devices produce more traffic and consume more bandwidth than simple feature

phones by several orders of magnitude.

• More Network Bandwidth. MNOs are increasing wireless bandwidth as they shift from 2.5G to

3G to 4G networks. However, mixed networks increase bandwidth variability across networks.

The

inherent

variability

of

RF

as

a

transmission

medium

persists,

regardless

of

bandwidth

capacity.

• More Mobile Content. Content providers are producing more content for mobile subscribers.

Over‐The‐Top (OTT) video use continues to grow on fixed Internet and wireless networks, driven

1 ‘Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2009‐2014,’ February 9, 2010. 2 Ibid





switched from dial‐up modems to DSL or cable modems, they consumed more content.3

More content consumed can lead to congestion, especially at critical choke points such as

backhaul leased lines.

2. Subscriber Quality of Experience

Subscriber expectations for wireless broadband are high. They want the same video experience

on their mobile device as their home or office computer. Video quality of experience consists of

three major parts.

• Session Quality. Session quality includes video set‐up time, synchronization of video with

audio, and rebuffering. When streaming video data arrives faster than video playback, a

buffer temporarily stores the video data for smooth video playback. If the available video

data is insufficient to play, rebuffering will pause the video playback and frustrates users.

• Video Quality. Video quality consists of the picture quality of each frame, the number of

frames per second (frame rate), and the frequency of stalls. A clear frame contributes to a

perception of quality, as opposed to a fuzzy frame or a frame with blocks of missing parts.

The number of frames per second required for a smooth perception of motion depends on

the actual video content. For example, an action sports video requires a higher frame rate

than a video of a newscaster talking. The frequency and duration of stalls also degrades

quality, and frequent stalling often leads to subscribers abandoning a video clip altogether.

• Audio Quality. RF network variability and unpredictability can result in poor audio quality.

Audio quality and fidelity also affect the perceptions of video quality because the ear

influences the eye.

When a subscriber receives a poor video experience, the subscriber’s overall opinion of the

network brand diminishes. MNOs planning to segment subscribers and tier pricing to maximize

mobile data revenue must deliver acceptable quality of experience to premium video

subscribers.

3. Wasted Network Bandwidth

Even after compression, video files contain colossal amounts of data – thousands of times bigger

than messaging text or text document files – which create strain on network resources. Video

delivery methods designed for the fixed Internet are not effective and efficient for the variable

wireless transmission medium. Inefficient mobile video delivery squanders enormous amounts

of bandwidth, driving up costs and restricting the total number of concurrent subscribers.

Inefficient bandwidth use:

3 Horrigan, John, ‘Broadband: What’s All the Fuss About?’ Pew Internet and Life Project, October, 2007





• Increases Operating Expenses. Wasted bandwidth increases network operating expenses in

the RAN, backhaul, leased lines, and the upstream path to the content provider. Every byte

of data delivered has a cost associated with it so delivering non‐essential data raises

operating expenses.

• Increases Capital Expenses. Wasted bandwidth equals wasted network capacity and drives

network expansion projects. Avoidable RAN and backhaul bandwidth expansion costs

money, which raises capital expenses.

• Increases Congestion. When the data load is greater than the capacity of a network,

congestion occurs. Backhaul and RF spectrum are both potential chokepoints.

• Limits the Number of Simultaneous Subscribers. When bandwidth is congested, it limits the

total number of simultaneous users in a radio sector, backhaul, and the overall network.

4. Complex Mobile Video Ecosystem. Besides MNOs, the mobile video ecosystem includes content

providers (e.g., YouTube, Hulu, and Netflix), national and regional Internet service providers

(ISP), device manufacturers, device operating systems, and video protocol software developers.

• Fragmented and Evolving Video Protocols and Standards. Compression is required to send

video over the Internet and wireless networks. A large variety of audio and video

compression encoders and decoders (codecs) and file formats exist in the market. A few

years ago, video streaming RTSP (Real Time Streaming Protocol) was dominant on the web

but with the rise of streaming OTT video on the fixed Internet, HTTP progressive download

emerged as a significant protocol. Soon, HTTP adaptive streaming could make inroads and

Flash (.flv format) prevails on the web today. MP4 format and HTML5 are emerging.

• Current, Future, and Legacy Devices. An enormous variety of devices and video

configurations exist: feature phones, smartphones, netbooks, laptops, and tablets. Typically,

an MNO has hundreds of different device types in its network with a large variety of video

profiles.

5. Mobile Video Management

As mobile video grows in a network, it increases management complexity. MNO operational and

planning managers need analytical tools to diagnose mobile video behavior and set business rules to

manage traffic, save bandwidth, reduce OPEX, defer CAPEX, plan growth, and optimize revenue.

• Cost Reduction. Managing network operating and capital expenses demands behavioral

information and intelligence.





• Revenue Maximization. Serving segmented and premium subscribers’ demands requires

the delivery of a higher quality of experience.

• Logistics. Serving a wide range of devices and protocols requires logistical centralization and

simplification. Rapid mobile video growth requires intelligent architecting and scaling.

History of Mobile Video Solutions

Mobile video delivery relies on fixed Internet techniques, but these techniques are inadequate for the

wireless environment. Conventional techniques fall short of delivering quality and optimizing mobile

network efficiency. Fixed Internet techniques include:

• Bit‐Rate Capping or Lowest Common Denominator Content Reduction. Reducing video and

audio to a lowest common denominator to reduce the size of the video data file results in poor

quality of experience for all subscribers. It is a one‐size‐fits‐all approach that does not allow

segmentation of subscribers and the ability to serve premium subscribers with tiered pricing.

• Content‐Device Customization. Content customization for different devices is complicated.

Many mobile device types, operating systems, screen resolutions, video protocols and

standards, and proliferating content providers combine to produce a logistical nightmare.

• Tiered Bit‐Rate Switching. Tiered bit‐rate switching predetermines different bit rates but does

not consider real‐time RF conditions that can change in microseconds. It is slow to adapt and

does not cater to specific reasons for changes in RF conditions, resulting in poor quality of

experience or wasted bandwidth.

• Transcoding Only. Transcoding is the digital conversion of one encoding to another to reduce

file size. Transcoding causes a progressive loss of quality and, by itself, offers a substandard user

experience.

• Changing Subscriber Data Pricing Models. MNO tiered data pricing, for example AT&T’s tiered

pricing, is emerging as MNOs try to control network use and segment subscribers. However,

tiered pricing alone is not sufficient to maximize mobile video efficiency.

Solution Overview Mobile Video Optimization Mobile video optimization is a method to improve mobile video quality of experience and reduce

wasted bandwidth.

How does it work? The video optimization gateway located in the MNO’s data center assesses network,

device, and video content conditions in real‐time and dynamically optimizes mobile video for each user,

while simultaneously minimizing bandwidth consumption. Optimization can reduce unnecessary mobile

video data transmission by 30% to 50%.





Data optimization is not the same as video optimization. Mobile video optimization not only analyzes

real‐time RF network conditions and device technologies, it analyzes video content as well. Optimization

of content assesses video quality of experience components and makes real‐time optimization trade‐

offs depending on content, network, and device conditions.

Video Optimization Gateway Mobile video optimization is handled by video optimization gateways. The video optimization gateway

consists of several components and is located in an MNO data center, positioned between the Internet

and the RAN. See figure 1.

Figure 1: Network Overview

Functional Features

Application Aware Bandwidth Allocation

Application Aware Bandwidth Allocation apportions just the right amount of bandwidth to each

subscriber. For example, if one subscriber needs 750 Kbps of bandwidth for video, while another

needs only 250 Kbps, Application Aware Bandwidth Allocation delivers bit rates catered to each

subscriber’s specific need.

In contrast, brute force, non video aware methods simply deliver 500 Kbps to each mobile video

subscriber regardless of a subscriber’s bandwidth requirements. Brute force results in wasted

bandwidth or poor quality. 500 Kbps delivered to a subscriber needing only 250 Kbps wastes





bandwidth; while 500 Kbps delivered to a subscriber needing 750 Kbps results in stalls and a poor

user experience.

Application Aware Bandwidth Allocation allows more simultaneous subscribers across available

bandwidth, deferring the need for more RAN and backhaul capacity and associated capital expenses.

It also reduces RAN and backhaul operating expenses by reducing wasted bandwidth.

Client Buffer Management

Client Buffer Management estimates the video content in the subscriber device buffer and sends

just enough video data to enable continuous playback of the video instead of sending the entire

video file. Typically, subscribers seldom watch an entire video start to finish. Instead, they will watch

part of a video and then abandon it. Sending a four‐minute video clip when the subscriber only

watches one minute wastes bandwidth (in this example ¾ of the bandwidth utilized to send the

video is wasted).

Client Buffer Management coupled with Application Aware Bandwidth Allocation can save up to

60% in unnecessary bandwidth consumption. Regardless of network capacity, the two methods are

efficient ways to use network assets, especially in reducing operating expenses associated with data

transfer.

Content Aware Bandwidth Reduction

Content Aware Bandwidth Reduction checks video frames and their properties and reduces only the

parts of the content that a subscriber would not notice. The static part of a video image from frame

to frame is redundant data that can be reduced. The goal is to reduce bandwidth while providing the

same perceived quality of experience. Content Aware Bandwidth Reduction makes trade‐offs

between frame quality, smoothness, and bandwidth by taking advantage of the human perceptional

system.

By analyzing video content properties, Content Aware Bandwidth Reduction, saves 20% to 30% in

bandwidth. When mobile video congests networks, Content Aware Bandwidth Reduction relieves

congestion.

Network Aware Adaption

Network Aware Adaption shapes a video to match real‐time RF network conditions using

transrating, which adjusts bit rates to variable bandwidth conditions. When network conditions

worsen because of RF fades and noise, the bit rate must be adapted to match network conditions or

the video will stall, Network Aware Adaption reduces bandwidth only during drops in bandwidth,

dynamically changing to match bandwidth conditions and thus delivering the best possible quality

under the current network conditions.





Network Aware Adaption can achieve 20% to 30% bandwidth reductions, depending on the nature

of the content and network conditions. Again, this method reduces bandwidth, reducing OPEX and

deferring CAPEX, while still delivering an acceptable quality of experience to subscribers.

Device Aware Adaptation

Device Aware Adaptation centralizes and simplifies mobile video management of devices. Using

Device Aware Adapation, the mobile video gateway detects each device and its video profile using a

database of device profiles. Different devices have different profiles ‐ screen sizes, resolutions,

CPUs, players, and codecs and levels.

Legacy feature‐phones need different types of optimizations than current smartphones, netbooks,

and laptops. Despite the rapid penetration of smartphones and netbooks in mobile networks, legacy

devices make up most devices in the typical MNO’s network.

Caching and Distribution

Caching reduces upstream operating expenses by storing data in temporary memory for local

distribution. Caching saves multiple retrievals of the same video from content distributors, which

saves bandwidth in the upstream link and minimizes operating expenses.

Popular videos should be cached. For video portals, caching is an effective way to reduce data

transfer costs from the original content providers. For overseas operators, the transoceanic costs of

retrieving video content from North American content distributors can be disproportionately high.

Figure 2: Features and Benefits





Operational Features

In addition to the functional features, a video optimization gateway must support fundamental

operational requirements.

Linear Scalability

Rapid growth of mobile video requires rapid scalability. Architecting a solution using a modular,

distributed design supports rapid growth.

Gateway Intelligence and Management

Managing mobile video in a network requires the ability to collect intelligence about subscriber and

network behavior and set policies to heighten network efficiency and user experience. A gateway

management system should be flexible enough to set parameters to carry out business policies for

each of a gateway’s functional features. Subscriber and network intelligence data should be

exportable

to

off ‐

the‐

shelf

data

mining

tools

to

allow

thorough

analysis

and

support

business

decisions.

The goal is to reduce costs and increase revenues and profits in the delivery of mobile video.

Behavioral intelligence helps planners design networks efficiently. Segmenting subscribers and

serving premium subscribers are opportunities to maximize revenue from subscriptions and

advertising.

Clientless

Ideally, video optimization gateways should be clientless. This means it is not necessary to download

dedicated

client

software

onto

a

subscriber

device

to

optimize

or

playback

video.

Instead,

the

video

optimization gateway should be device aware and automatically detect the device’s video

capabilities.

Carrier Grade

The gateway should be carrier grade, easy to integrate, and deliver five‐nines reliability with self ‐

testing, error correction, redundancy, and maintenance service support.

Evolutionary Features

The mobile video optimization gateway must be future proof in its functionality. This requires

modular product road maps that support evolving protocols, standards, devices, resolutions, and

video content categories and business models (open, DRM protected, subscription, advertising).





Conclusion Mobile video use is growing exponentially and strains network capacity. Inefficient mobile video delivery

wastes bandwidth and degrades quality of experience. RF variability and unpredictability, even with 4G,

causes unnecessary bandwidth consumption and variable quality of experience while raising operating

and capital expenses.

A video optimization gateway customizes mobile video quality to each subscriber while minimizing data

delivered through the wireless network. It can save 30% to 50% in mobile video bandwidth, reducing

OPEX and delaying network CAPEX by allowing more simultaneous users. Video optimization gateways

also simplify a complex ecosystem of devices, video protocols and standards, and content models.

Ortiva Wireless – Mobile Video Optimization Experts Ortiva Wireless focuses on mobile video optimization for mobile network operators and video portals,

providing video optimization software, gateways, and services.

Ortiva’s iVOG video optimization gateway helps MNOs and video portals save bandwidth, reduce OPEX,

increase simultaneous users, and defer CAPEX, while delivering optimized mobile video quality of

experience to subscribers and centralizing and simplifying mobile video management. iVOG is designed

for 2.5G, 3G, and 4G networks, video portals, and a wide range of devices. It is carrier grade, scalable,

and provides intelligence and flexible rules for managing mobile video delivery efficiently.

For a presentation, demonstration, or trial of the iVOG video optimization gateway, contact:

Ortiva Wireless

4225 Executive Square, Suite 700

La Jolla, CA 92037, USA

Tel: +1 858 704 1550

Fax: +1 858 704 1721

E‐mail: [email protected]

Website: www.ortivawireless.com

whitepaper_optimizingmobilevideo

Documents