Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Search
Pricing multicasting in more practical network models
Adler M., Rubenstein D.  Discrete algorithms (Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium, San Francisco, California, Jan 6-8, 2002)981-990.2002.Type:Proceedings
Date Reviewed: Feb 4 2003

Multicasting offers tremendous savings over unicast transmission because it allows receivers to share bandwidth. The same content is transmitted only once by the sender, but is received by multiple receivers. The authors of this paper consider the practice of charging all receivers equally, based on a flat rate or usage-based pricing scheme, to be inadequate. Instead, they propose an auction mechanism with bidding.

A multicast session can be sent at multiple pre-determined rates, either using a separate multicast group for each rate (split session paradigm), or aggregating several layers (layered paradigm). A receiver places a bid per rate, indicating its willingness to pay for delivery at that rate. The marginal cost mechanism is used to determine the set of receivers that obtain the content at a particular rate. The price charged to an accepted receiver can be lower (but not more) than the original bid for that rate.

The authors first demonstrate that the problem can be solved with acceptable effort if two simplifying, but not very realistic, assumptions are added: multicasting introduces no additional costs, and there is a single source and fixed multicast tree for all groups and layers. If one of the assumptions is dropped, the problem becomes more difficult to solve (NP-hard).

There seem to be additional severe restrictions to this paradigm, however. The mathematical programming approach that is used also requires that all information (receivers, rates, bids) be known in advance, and not change afterwards, with the consequence that receivers cannot join or leave the multicast session dynamically. Also, receivers pay for a particular rate, but what if traffic metering indicates that this quality of service (QoS) was not obtained? How much then does the receiver have to pay for this lower rate? Or do we have to recompute the whole algorithm?

Reviewer:  F. Put Review #: CR126910 (0304-0359)
Bookmark and Share
 
Computer-Communication Networks (C.2 )
 
Would you recommend this review?
yes
no
Other reviews under "Computer-Communication Networks": Date
Asynchronous health care communication
Wilson E. Communications of the ACM 46(6): 79-84, 2003. Type: Article
Jul 25 2003
OSPF: anatomy of an Internet routing protocol
Moy J., Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1998.  345, Type: Book (9780201634723)
Aug 25 2003
SeRLoc: secure range-independent localization for wireless sensor networks
Lazos L., Poovendran R.  Wireless security (Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Workshop on Wireless Security, Philadelphia, PA, USA, Oct 1, 2004)21-30, 2004. Type: Proceedings
Nov 17 2004
more...

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2024 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy