Transcript COMET Proposal

COntent Mediator architecture for
content-aware nETworks
Francisco Javier Ramón Salguero ([email protected])
Telefónica Investigación y Desarrollo
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 1
© COMET
The COMET project
Introduction
•
COMET (COntent Mediator architecture for content-aware
nETworks)
•
•
•
•
•
FP7 project, Collaborative project (STREP)
Theme: ICT-2009.1.5 Networked Media and 3D Internet
Duration: 3 years
Budget: 4,948,612 € (EC contribution: 3,259,365 €)
Partners:
Industrial partners
•
Academic partners
Web: http://www.comet-project.org/
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 2
© COMET
Rationale
The environment
• Growing bandwidth needs
• From machine access to content
access
• Growing proliferation of Internet multimedia content:
• Traditional contents being transferred to the Internet
• Surge of prosumers
• QoE expectations for Internet media
approaching to traditional media
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 3
© COMET
Rationale
QoE expectations
• QoE in Internet:
“I have watched a TV episode and it was great.
Definition was fine.”
means
It works well 90% of times. I started watching the episode quickly and
the episode was not abnormally interrupted. Definition was not too bad.
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 4
© COMET
Rationale
QoE expectations
• QoE in Internet:
“I have watched a TV episode and it was great.
Definition was fine.”
means
It works well 90% of times. I started watching the episode quickly and
the episode was not abnormally interrupted. Definition was not too bad.
• QoE in IPTV:
It works well 90% of times. I started watching the episode quickly and
the episode was not abnormally interrupted. Definition was not too bad.
becomes
“My ISP is cheating on me!”
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 5
© COMET
The COMET project
Top-level objectives
•
COMET aims to provide a unified interface for content
access whatever the content characteristics are:
–
–
–
–
•
temporal nature (pre-recorded or live),
physical location (centralised or distributed),
interactivity requirements (elastic or real-time), or
any other relevant features
It also aims to apply the most appropriate end-to-end
transport strategy:
– By mapping the content according to its requirements and user
preferences to the appropriate network resources
•
best quality of experience for end users
– All different types of content distribution will be supported:
•
Unicast, anycast, multicast…
… while preserving network availability and structural
resilience, as key factors in perceived QoE
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 6
© COMET
Content mediation for efficient traffic distribution
Requirements
Contradiction
between both
worlds???
IMPLICATIONS:
USER VIEW: FLEXIBILITY
End user
IMPLICATIONS:
Router
o
o
o
o
Interface as simple as possible
Flexible identification
Help to search capabilities
A huge amount of IDs and information
(disaggregation)
Router
Router
o Maximum BW & Users with minimum cost
o Minimum number of IDs and rules
(aggregation)
Router
Content server
BUILDING BLOCKS:
Router
Router
PHYSICAL NETWORK: SCALABILITY & STABILITY
• Local QoS & Multicast
• Evolution of basic network
services (DNS, RADIUS, LDAP)
End user
Content server
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 7
© COMET
Content mediation for efficient traffic distribution
Requirements
THE COMET CONCEPT: Mediation to connect both worlds efficiently
Contradiction
 Locatingboth
content according to delivery requirements (content mediation)
between
IMPLICATIONS:
 worlds???
Delivering it using the most suitable resourceso (network
mediation)
Interface as simple
as possible
o Flexible identification
Content Mediation Plane
o Help to search capabilities
o A huge amount of IDs and information
(disaggregation)
USER VIEW: FLEXIBILITY
VIRTUALIZATION
Mediation server
Mediation server
NEW NETWORK
SERVICES
Mediation server
EFFICIENT
INFRASTRUCTURE
End user
IMPLICATIONS:
Router
Router
Router
o Maximum BW & Users with minimum cost
o Minimum number of IDs and rules
(aggregation)
Router
Content server
BUILDING BLOCKS:
Router
Router
• Local QoS & Multicast
PHYSICAL NETWORK: SCALABILITY & STABILITY Content• Evolution
Forwarding
Plane
of basic
network
services (DNS, RADIUS, LDAP)
End user
Content server
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 8
© COMET
Our objectives, briefly
Project orientation
• Project oriented to practice
– Focused on practical objectives: satisfaction of actual demands
• We should solve something demanded by someone 
– Feasible:
• Technically possible
• Scalable (for actual deployments)
– Demonstrable in practice
• Proof-of-concept prototypes in realistic network testbeds
• Scalability and performance evaluated through theoretical studies and
simulations.
• Project oriented to standardization and dissemination
• Internet-wide scope
• Required to influence Industry
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 9
© COMET 2009
The COMET project
Organization - Workplan
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
WP1: Project Management
1.1: Project Administration
1.2: Website and Mailing Lists Maintenance
MS11
MS12
Y2: Implementation
WP2: Requirements and System Architecture
D2.1
2.1: System Requirements
2.2: Business Models
MS13
MS21
2.3: Architecture and High-level Design
D2.3
D2.2
I2.1
WP3: Content Mediation System
I3.1
D3.2
D3.1
3.1: User/Application Interaction with the Content Mediation System Edge
3.2: Intra Content Mediation System Protocols and Algorithms
3.3: Network and Content Server Awareness in the Content Mediation System
D3.3
MS31
3.4: Content Mediation System Implementation
WP4: Content-aware Network Enhancement
I4.1
D4.2
D4.1
Y3: Demonstration
4.1: Non-disruptive Deployment on the Current Internet
4.2: Non-disruptive Deployment on IP networks with Multi-Service Capabilities
4.3: Disruptive Deployment Based on Edge Computed Routing (ECR)
D4.3
MS41
4.4: Router Prototypes Adapted to Content-aware Networking
WP5: Integration, Validation and Evaluation
MS52
5.2 Integration and Validation of the COMET System
I5.1
D5.2
I5.2
5.3: Evaluation of COMET System Scalability
Y1: Design of the
architecture
6.2 Prototype Experimentation and Demonstration
WP6: Experimentation and Demonstration
6.1 Demonstration Scenarios
WP7: Exploitation, Dissemination and Standardization
D5.1
MS51
5.1: Integration with Selected Applications
D7.1
MS71
D6.1
D6.2
D7.2
D7.3
7.1 Coordination of Dissemination and Standardization
D7.4
7.2 Development of Exploitation Plans and Roadmaps for Deployment
Deliverable
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Milestone
Slide 10
Internal Report
© COMET
The COMET project
WP organization
WP1
Project Management
TID
D2.1
WP3
I3.1,
D3.1
Content Mediation
System
UCL
I2.1
WP2
I3.1
Requirements and
System Architecture
TID
D3.3
D3.2
I2.1
D4.2
I4.1
D4.1
D4.3
D5.1
I4.1,
D4.1
D5.2
WP5
I5.1
Content-aware
Network Enhancement
UniS
D6.1
WP6
Integration, Validation
and Evaluation
D5.1
WUT
WP4
D2.2
D2.3
D3.1
D3.2,
D3.3
I5.2
D4.2,
D4.3
Experimentation
and Demonstration
PrimeTel
D6.2
I5.1, I5.2
WP7
D7.1
D7.3
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Exploitation, Dissemination
and Standardization
INTRACOM TELECOM
Slide 11
D7.2
D7.4
© COMET
The COMET project
Concertation Meeting, Brussels, 3rd February 2010
Slide 12
© COMET