Quantifying the Effect of Content-based Transport Strategies for Online Role Playing Games

718 views
664 views

Published on

The QoS requirements of game messages may differ because of the latter’s intrinsic characteristics. In this paper, we propose three content-based strategies for quantifying the effects of different QoS levels. The strategies assign appropriate QoS requirements for game messages based on our analysis of Angel’s Love action logs. We evaluate several transport protocols, including TCP, UDP, SCTP, DCCP, and our content-based transport protocol using the action logs of Angel’s Love. Through simulations, we quantify the performance of our content-based strategies. The results show that the strategies incur much lower end-to-end delay and end-to-end jitter than existing transport protocols.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
718
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
12
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Quantifying the Effect of Content-based Transport Strategies for Online Role Playing Games

  1. 1. Quantifying the Effect of Content‐based Transport MNe t Strategies for Online Role Playing Games Chih-Ming Chen1, Kuan-Ta Chen2, and Polly Huang1 M 1National Taiwan University 2Academia Sinica Lab Motivation Transport Strategies Performance Evaluation Protocol MMORPGs Average end‐to‐end transmission latencies Message Type In-Order Delivery Reliability TCP World of Warcraft, Lineage I/II, Guild Wars, Ragnarok Move Client Traffic Server Traffic Online, Anarchy Online, Angel’s Love 600 UDP EverQuest, City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, Ultima Attack √ TCP P_MRO TCP P_MRO 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 UDP P_MR UDP P_MR Online, Final Fantasy XI Talk √ √ 500 Mean delay (ms) Mean delay (ms) SCTP P_M SCTP P_M TCP/UDP Dark Age of Camelot Multi‐streaming 400 There is no consensus on protocols for MMORPGs • Put different message types into separate streams 300 • e.g., move message, attack message, talk message MMORPGs requirements 200 Optional ordering Low transmission latency • Certain message types do not require in‐order transport 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 No unexpected “lags” Client # Client # • e.g., move message, attack message Optional reliability Average end‐to‐end delay jitters (standard deviation of delays) Objective • Certain message types do not require reliability • e.g., move message Client Traffic Server Traffic 250 600 TCP P_MRO TCP P_MRO Quantify the effect of content‐based transport strategies Strategy Multi-Streaming Optional Optional UDP P_MR UDP P_MR 200 500 SCTP P_M SCTP P_M Mean jitter (ms) Mean jitter (ms) Evaluate existing transport protocols Ordering Reliability 400 150 MRO √ 300 • TCP, UDP, DCCP, SCTP 100 MR √ √ 200 Propose and evaluate three content‐based transport strategies   50 100 M √ √ √ usingnetwork simulations 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Real-Life Game Traces Real-Life Client # Client # Simulation Setup Users’ action trace of Angel’s Love Trace‐driven network simulation using ns‐2 simulator Summary Fishbone topology • 1 game server  Improvement of Delay Improvement of Delay Jitter • 2 network routers Client Traffic Server Traffic Client Traffic Server Traffic 100 100 100 100 70 Clients 70 Clients 70 Clients 70 Clients • n game clients  140 Clients 75 140 Clients 140 Clients 79 140 Clients 80 80 80 80 73 69 69 • m cross traffic pairs 55 60 60 60 60 Score Score Score Score 45 46 Client Node (CN) 40 40 40 40 33 28 CNi+2 . . .  CN CN2 . . .  CN Traffic Node (TN) 20 20 20 20 8 10 n i 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 5 5 CNi+1 CN1 0 0 0 0 P_MRO P_MR P_M P_MRO P_MR P_M P_MRO P_MR P_M P_MRO P_MR P_M Protocol Protocol Protocol Protocol Client to Server Server to Client TNj+1 TN1 Server Protocol Delay Jitter Delay Jitter TNj+2 . . . TNm TN2 TN . . .  j TCP NA NA NA NA SCTP ≈ ≈ ★ ★ DCCP (TCP-like) ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★ ★★★ Bandwidth & propagation delay DCCP (TFRC) ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ Link Bandwidth Propagation Delay UDP ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★ Server <--> Router 600 Kbps 70 ms PMRO ≈ ≈ ★ ★ Router <--> Router 600 Kbps 70 ms PMR ≈ ≈ ★★ ★★ Router <--> Client 64 ~ 128 Kbps 70 ms PM ★★★ ★★★ ★★★ ★★ User ID Actions (M: Move, A: Attack, T: Talk) Description: NA denotes incomparable, ≈ denotes similar, ☆ denotes worse, ★ denotes better, ★ ★ denotes  Router <--> Traffic Node 64 ~ 128 Kbps 70 ms 10159 MMMMMMMMMMMMMAMMAMMMMMMAMMMMMMMMMM much better, ★ ★ ★ denotes good, ★ ★ ★ ★ denotes very good, and ★ ★ ★ ★ denotes excellent. 11 pairs cross traffic with 500 Kbps sending rate 12454 MMAAMAMMMMMAAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMA 16728 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMAMMTTTTTTTTTTTT Multimedia Networking and Systems Lab Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica http://mmnet.iis.sinica.edu.tw

×