An Application Gateway to Deploy High-quality

Video Communications in Various Network

Environments

Takashi Kishida
Kaori Maeda
Eitaro Kohno
Yoshiaki Kakuda

HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 2
Overview
 Introduction
 Purpose
 Feature of PTGATE
 Evaluations
 Discussions
 Conclusion

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 3
Background
 Video communication is being popular by
spreading broadband networks
Teleconference
Distance learning
Telemedicine
 IPv6 infrastructure is being deployed
Japan Gigabit Network is provided by National Institute
of Information and Communications Technology
Japan’s government announced the plan to be going to
shift the system to IPv6 by 2008.
Video communication is one of important applications
even in deploying IPv6
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 4
Problems
 On Applications
Most of commercial videoconference systems
do not work in IPv6
 On Network Transition
IPv6 is not available in many commercial and school
networks in Japan at this point

To solve both problems at the same time

is the most ideal goal

Any transition solution is required

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 5
Purpose

Development of a gateway system called as PTGATE

to use the current resources for videoconference for
smooth transition to IPv6.

 Our goal of this research is to realize video

communications in various situations even in the
transition period not to fail to promote IPv6

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 6
Features of PTGATE
PTGATE
PTGATE

IPv6/IPv4 tunneling

Multicast tunneling Videoconference

Port aggregation systems

Error recovery

 PTGATE solves transition problems even with current

videoconference systems
 PTGATE uses IP-in-IP encapsulation

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 7
Outline of the system process

Router
IP A UDP PTGW Router B
IP UDPIPPTGW
Payload
IP Payload

Internet
PTGATE checks
the destination
Decapsulation
Port aggregation
IPv6/IPv4FEC
tunneling
decoding
Sender Receiver
PTGATE A FEC encoding PTGATE B

PTGATEs are located in the same subnet

The
The
All
Sender
default
packets
and
gateway
from
the Receiver
theofSender
the Sender
areare
videoconference
sent
is set
toto
PTGATE
PTGATE
systems
AA
of the Sender and the Receiver, respectively.
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 8
Implementation
 Development environment

OS Fedora core 2 (kernel 2.6.9)

Redhat Linux 8.0 (kernel 2.4.28)
CPU Pentium 4 3.2GHz
Memory 1GB

 Userland application --- Easy installation

 Confirmation of implementation
 Vine Linux 2.6, 3.0, 3.1(kernel 2.4.28)
 Debian (kernel 2.4.18)
 Fedora core 2 (kernel 2.6.9)
 Redhat Linux 8.0, 9.0(kernel 2.4.28)
 Knoppix 3.6(kernel 2.4.27) (using USB memory stick)
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 9
Available videoconference systems with PTGATE
Confirmed systems
 VIC/RAT
 VideoLAN
 DVTS
 Robst
 Netmeeting (H.323)
 GnomeMeeting(H.323) H.323 systems
 Polycom Viewstation (H.323)
 Sony PCS-1 (H.323) commercial
videoconference
 Victor DM-NE300/ND300 systems
 OKI Visualcast-SS
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 10

Evaluation
 Practical Experiments
Multicast tunnel
IPv6/IPv4tunnel and error recovery function
 FEC performance measurement
 Performance Evaluation
Throughput
ＲＴＴ and Jitter
Overhead of FEC

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 11
Practical Experiments I - Multicast tunnel

audio conferencing system Hiroshima Univ.

MRAT(128kbps)

Hiroshima City Univ.

Multicast
Multicast
Saga Univ.

Multicast
Not supporting multicast
Interoperability problems Multicast
misconfigured routers
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 12
Practical Experiments I - Multicast tunnel

audio conferencing system Hiroshima Univ.

MRAT(128kbps)

Hiroshima City Univ. PTGATE

Multicast
Multicast
Saga Univ.
PTGATE

Multicast
PTGATE
： Multicast Tunnel

Multicast

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 13
Practical Experiments II - IPv6/IPv4tunnel
JGNv6 Network 　
IPv6
Multicast
IPv6 IPv4 encapsulation
Sender
IPv4
Sapporo
Sapporo Snow Festival
PTGATE Hiroshima City Univ.

RIBB2 Network
Multicast
IPv6
IPv4 decapsulation

PTGATE

PTGATE

PTGATE Receiver
Yamanashi
Receiver Toyama
Kochi
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 Receiver HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 14
Practical Experiments II – Receivers result

Toyama Kochi Yamanashi

Lost packets
59694 59737 59738
(Before an error recovery)
Lost packets
429 446 438
(After an error recovery)
Packet loss rate [%]
0.4493 0.4504 0.4504
(Before an error recovery)
Packet loss rate [%]
0.0032 0.0034 0.0033
(After an error recovery)
Jitter (ms) 1.1020 0.8750 1.1396

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
Performance Evaluation 15

- Experimental environment
Subnet A Subnet B
192.168.2.0/24 Router 192.168.1.0/24
AT AR450s

100baseTX 100baseTX

Iperf
(payload1400byte
Transmitting time
Host A Host B
60 sec) PTGW A PTGW B

　 Host A PTGW A PTGW B Host B

OS VineLinux 3.1 RedHat 8.0 Fedora core2 Fedora core 3
PentiumⅢ Pentium4 Pentium4 PentiumⅢ
CPU 1GHz 3.2GHz 3.2GHz 1GHz
Memory 512MB 1024MB 1024MB 384MB
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
Performance Evaluation 16

- UDP Throughput

Subnet A Subnet B
192.168.2.0/24 Router 192.168.1.0/24
AT AR450s

100baseTX 100baseTX

Iperf
(payload1400byte
Transmitting time
Host A Host B
60 sec) PTGW A PTGW B

Not using PTGATE

UDP: 95.0 Mbps

Using PTGATE - 2.3 Mbps

UDP: 92.7 Mbps
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
Performance Evaluation 17

- The growth rate of the bandwidth

ip + udp + ptgate + payload
Bt =
payload

– ip (IP header : 20byte)

– udp (UDP header : 8byte) 36byte
– ptgate (PTGATE header : 8byte)

1.026 times (payload 1400byte)

2.3Mbps is almost equals to the calculated value

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
Performance Evaluation 18

- RTT

Subnet A Subnet B
192.168.2.0/24 Router 192.168.1.0/24
AT AR450s
Not using PTGATE
RTT: 1.6 ms
100baseTX 100baseTX
+0.7 ms
RTT: 2.3 ms
Using PTGATE
Host A Host B
PTGW A PTGW B

Ping
ICMP payload length : 1400 bytes
Transmitting time : 240 sec

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
Performance Evaluation 19

- Jitter

Subnet A Subnet B
192.168.2.0/24 Router 192.168.1.0/24
AT AR450s
Not using PTGATE
Jitter: 0.04 ms
100baseTX 100baseTX
+0.07 ms
Jitter: 0.11 ms
Using PTGATE
Host A Host B
PTGW A PTGW B

Iperf
Bandwidth : 8 Mbps
Payload length : 1400 byte
Transmission time : 60 sec

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY
 Performance Evaluation 20

- Overhead of FEC
CPU: Pentium4 3.2GHz
100
Receiving data rate (Mbps)

90
No FEC
80
The growth rate of the bandwidth
70
1.108 times
60
1.193 times
50 42.4 Mbps
1.293 times 36.0 Mbps RS(15,14)
40
26.1 Mbps RS(15,13)
30
20 RS(15,12)

10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
27-Jan-06 SendingS data
A I N T 2 rate
006 (Mbps) HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 21
Conclusion
 Development and Evaluation of a gateway system
called as PTGATE
 By using this system, current resources such as
videoconference systems and IPv4 networks are
available even in the combination of IPv4 and IPv6.

PTGATE realizes video communications in various situations

even in the transition period not to fail to promote IPv6

 Future Works
 More practical experiments
 Evaluate the availability of PTGATE in actual networks
27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY
UNIVERSITY
 22
Thank you for listening!
 PTGATE is opened
http://www.v6.ipc.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/projects/ptgate/index.php

27-Jan-06 SAINT2006 HIROSHIMA CITY

UNIVERSITY