236 mobile optimization-cdnetworks
-
Upload
naver-d2 -
Category
Technology
-
view
1.227 -
download
2
Transcript of 236 mobile optimization-cdnetworks
Mobile Op*miza*on
Oct. 2013 / Sangjoon Ahn
Page 1
Agenda § Introduc9on
§ Market trend
§ Mobile Op9miza9on Technologies § TCP op9miza9on § FEO § Image Op9miza9on § Performance Test of FEO & Image Op9miza9on
§ Mobile CDN § Considera9on of Mobile Delivery
§ Conclusion
Page 2
Introduc9on -‐ Market Trend -‐ LTE Status
Page 3
Mobile Trend § According to Cisco's Visual Network Index report from Feb. 2013
§ Two-‐thirds of the world's mobile data traffic will be video by 2017. § Global mobile data traffic will increase 13-‐fold between 2012 and 2017 § In 2017, 4G will be 10 percent of connec9ons, but 45 percent of total traffic § Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2012-‐201
7 : h[p://www.cisco.com/en/US/solu9ons/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns537/ns705/ns827/white_paper_c11-‐520862.html
Page 4
MNO Status
Page 5
Web Performance And User Expecta9on
Page 6
Impact of 1 second delay
Page 7
Web Accelera9on How web site page load 9me breaks down
First-‐mile
l Database calls l HTML page genera9on
Middle-‐mile
l Retrieving page contents, including HTML, images, Javascript, etc., from origin server, across the internet
l Delivering content over cable modem, Cellular network, etc., to end-‐user
l Rendering page in the browser
Front-‐end 10 ~ 20 % 80 ~ 90%
Problem Addressed How it works
Contents Delivery Network (CDN) Network Latency Files cache in mul9ple edge caches tha
t are geographically dispersed
Dynamic Web Accelera9on (DWA)
Network Latency(especially dynamic content)
Op9mize rou9ng TCP op9miza9on Compression
Front-‐end Op9miza9on (FEO)
Reduce HTTP Requests, page size and browser bo[lenecks
Op9mize HTML code and page resources
Internet Internet
Backend
Last-‐mile
Page 8
Mobile Op9miza9on QoE improvement for mobile user
Improve Latency
Improve Transfer rate
Improve Responsibility & Reduce Traffic
Improve QoE
QoE
[L4 improvement] TCP (Transport-‐level)Op*miza*on
[L5 improvement] Adopt SPDY/RE Technology HTTP (Session-‐level) op*miza*on
[L6 improvement] Adopt FEO Technology HTML (Presenta*on-‐level) Op*miza*on
[L7 improvement] Content Op*miza*on Video Pacing, Image Op*miza*on and etc.
[L1-‐L3 improvement] Adopt CDN (beZer performance than ISP N/W)
Today Topic
Page 9
TCP Op9miza9on
Page 10
§ TCP § Designed to probe available bandwidth § Does not use full bandwidth from start
TCP conges9on control & avoidance
Page 11
§ Don’t know characteris9cs of cellular network § Bufferbloat by large queue in mobile network § Interference by middlebox deployed inside mobile network
§ Don’t consider about TCP characteris9cs § overshoo9ng by TCP slow start
§ Limited Slow start, hystart
§ can detect conges9on by packet loss § Delay-‐based conges9on control : vegas, westwood
§ Traffic control of heavy users § Too much retransmit overhead on bandwidth limited network and congested
area network
TCP performance on mobile network is poor?
Page 12
Performance Bo[leneck
PGW eNB
SGW NAT Mobile Device
Candidate : DRWA (Dynamic Receiver Window Adjustment)
Issues Bufferbloat by middle boxes
Limit bandwidth of heavy users
Issue of latency and available bandwidth
How to solve performance issues
DRWA (Dynamic Receiver Window Adjustment)
Traffic control at applica*on-‐level.
Limited Slow Start Tuning TCP parameter and Conges*on Control Algorithm
GGSN SGSN NB Mobile Device
Origin 3G
LTE
3G 4G
Network Latency 100 ~ 200 ms 50 ~ 100 ms
Available Bandwidth 2 ~ 7 Mbps 70 ~ 150 Mbps
Page 13
Analysis of packet loss § Download 200KB on bandwidth-‐limit of heavy user : 300Kbps
§ Rxt overhead : 32.89 %, Download 9me : 4.58 sec
Page 14
Analysis of packet loss (cont’d) § Download 2MB on bandwidth-‐limit of heavy user : 300Kbps
§ Rxt overhead : 16.5 %, Download 9me : 57.41 sec
Page 15
TCP op9miza9on
§ Tuning § Limited slow start for preven9ng overshoo9ng § Tune Ini9al CWND
§ 2.6.39+ defaults to 10 § 2.6.19+ can be configured via IP ROUTE
§ ip route change default via gateway_ipaddr dev eth0 initcwnd 10
§ Tune CA (Conges9on Avoidance) for sending less aggressively data
§ Tune backoff when detected packet loss
§ Improve rxt rate of bandwidth-‐limited user (heavy user) § not easy to improve with current TCP § Shape bandwidth by force.
Page 16
Result of rxt rate of BW-‐limited user No Busy area : 10:00:00 ~ 15:30:00 Model 200K Num 300K Num 2M Num 50M Num
IS12S Normal TCP 157.7 10 142.1 10 117.2 10 Tuned TCP 100.3 10 103.0 10 108.5 10
ISW11SC Normal TCP 138.7 19 128.9 10 111.0 10 Tuned TCP 100.2 10 104.9 10 108.3 10
Busy area = 15:56:00 ~ 23:30:00 Model 200K Num 300K Num 2M Num 50M Num
IS12S Normal TCP 117.5 10 111.0 10 101.9 3 Tuned TCP 100.2 10 100.3 10 102.2 3
ISW11SC Normal TCP 116.7 11 120.0 10 110.6 10 Tuned TCP 100.2 11 102.2 10 106.2 10
B/W-‐limited phone
Page 17
Field test with tuned TCP
Page 18
FEO
Page 19
FEO § FEO technologies help to reduce the number of page resources required to down
load a given page and makes the browser process the page faster. § mod_pagespeed(MPS) is an Open Source FEO solu9on from Google. As Google d
efined it : Apache module for rewri9ng web pages to reduce latency and bandwidth
Page 20
Mod_pagespeed features § Op9mize caching
§ Extend Cache, Local storage cache § Outline CSS/javascript
§ Minimize Round Trip Times § Combine and Inline CSS/Javascript § Inline images, Sprite Images § Fla[en CSS @imports § Sharding domains
§ Minimize Payload sizes § Op9mize image (PNG/JPG/GIF/WebP) : remove metadata of Image, resize image § Minify CSS/Javascript § Deduplicate inlined images
§ Op9mize browser rendering § Defer Javascript § Move CSS to Head § Lazily load images § Convert JPEG to Progressive
Page 21
Web Request
§ DNS lookup to resolve the hostname to IP address § New TCP connec9on requiring a full roundtrip to the server § HTTP request requiring a full roundtrip to the server § Server processing 9me
§ Network latency on mobile network is longer than that on wired network.
Page 22
Mobile site performance challenges § Remove network latency overhead.
§ Careful about using Domain sharding § Don’t use redirect
§ Op9mize Cri9cal Rendering path § Inline cri9cal CSS § Remove blocking JavaScript § Defer non-‐cri9cal assets
§ Reduce HTTP requests § Image spri9ng § Inline small image/CSS/JS
§ Reduce image size § Op9mize Image
§ Load “above the fold”, not load en9re page. § Lazy-‐load images
§ Watch out for extra round-‐trips § Especially new connec9ons
Page 23
Lab Experiment
§ Test with mod_pagespeed as an open source FEO solu9on from Google
§ Test scenario § choose 5 sample sites : each web site for PC & mobile user § Simulate mobile network environment using TC tool
naver
daum
gmarket
samsung
auone
Origin
mod_pagespeed
Latency : 0, 50, 100ms
TC
TC
Page 24
w/o MPS naver daum gmarket samsung auone
First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache)
Request Count 75.8 0.1 112.3 2 256 22 199 1 43 8 Sent Kb 24.8 0.0 35.7 0.9 90.6 9.8 62.0 0.3 13.1 2.9 Receive Kb 393.5 0.6 553.1 0.8 5,434.1 7.8 1,079.2 18.5 231.3 10.6 HTML count/size(Kb) 7 51.0 0 0.0 14 55.3 1 0.3 12 39.4 0 0.0 3 48.7 1 18.5 2 17.8 1 8.3 JS count/size(Kb) 7 28.2 0 0.0 6 49.9 0 0.0 30 195.7 0 0.0 11 104.5 0 0.0 9 46.7 0 0.0 CSS count/size(Kb) 6 28.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 10.3 0 0.0 3 23.8 0 0.0 1 4.7 0 0.0
GIF count/size(Kb) 23.9 15.3 0 0.0
2 8.1 1 0.4
94 103.2 22 7.8
77 102.6 0 0.0
24 70.0 7 2.3
JPG count/size(Kb) 25 154.2 0 0.0 40 135.7 0 0.0 83 4,859.4 0 0.0 40 739.9 0 0.0 7 92.1 0 0.0 PNG count/size(Kb) 5.9 79.6 0.1 0.6 42 253.7 0 0.0 30 216.4 0 0.0 65 59.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Loading Time (0ms delay) 1.0 0.3 1.4 0.8 2.6 1.1 1.3 0.2 0.7 0.3 Loading Time (50ms delay) 2.2 0.4 2.6 0.8 5.7 1.1 3.8 0.4 1.4 0.5 Loading Time (100ms delay) 3.5 0.3 4.6 0.7 10.1 1.3 6.9 0.6 2.3 0.7
w MPS naver daum gmarket samsung auone
First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache)
Request Count 45 9 78.6 21.4 178.9 62 41 5 23 5 Sent Kb 15.5 2.9 26.6 7.7 66.5 25.5 13.5 1.5 7.2 1.6 Receive Kb 373.7 61.3 512.2 132.8 1,546.1 88.5 702.3 144.5 219.0 31.7 HTML count/size(Kb) 7 60.9 7 61.0 13 98.2 12 94.5 9 74.0 9 74.0 3 144.2 3 144.2 2 31.5 2 31.2 JS count/size(Kb) 7 27.5 0 0.0 6 49.4 0 0.0 26 184.3 3 0.6 10 95.2 1 0.2 5 42.9 0 0.0 CSS count/size(Kb) 5 34.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 10.5 0 0.0 3 41.0 1 0.2 1 4.9 0 0.0 GIF count/size(Kb) 0 0.0 0 0.0 1.3 7.9 1.2 0.3 34 31.0 31 10.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 6.0 3 0.5 JPG count/size(Kb) 19 139.2 1 0.2 12 69.7 0 0.0 80.9 1,016.8 8 1.4 19 396.0 0 0.0 7 92.6 0 0.0 PNG count/size(Kb) 6 75.6 0 0.0 37.3 240.3 3.2 37.2 19 218.1 6 1.0 6 25.8 0 0.0 5 41.1 0 0.0 Loading Time (0ms delay) 1.0 0.5 1.5 0.9 2.7 1.5 1.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 Loading Time (50ms delay) 1.9 0.8 2.6 1.4 4.0 3.7 2.7 1.1 1.5 1.0 Loading Time (100ms delay) 3.0 1.3 4.5 1.8 6.8 2.4 4.0 1.8 2.5 1.6
Req No.
30.1% Sent Size
26.7% Receive Size
71.5% Loading Time
37.6%
Req No.
79.4% Sent Size
78.3%
Receive Size
35.0% Loading Time
42.4%
Req No.
40.6% Sent Size
37.3% Receive Size
5.0% Loading Time
15.0%
Req No.
30.0% Sent Size
25.5% Receive Size
7.4% Loading Time
3.3%
Req No.
46.5% Sent Size
45.1% Receive Size
5.3% Loading Time
7.3%
Test result of PC website
Page 25
w/o MPS M_naver M_daum M-‐gmarket M_samsung auone
First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache)
Request Count 30 1 31.9 1 68.8 3 47 46 59 0 Sent Kb 9.7 0.4 10.2 0.4 22.4 1.3 15.6 18.6 18.6 0.0 Receive Kb 209.2 0.3 146.6 0.3 565.2 1.1 340.0 8.5 195.5 0.0 HTML count/size(Kb) 2 20.8 0 0.0 4 19.1 0 0.0 1 4.0 0 0.0 2 5.1 1 0.2 1 9.1 0 0.0 JS count/size(Kb) 6 39.0 0 0.0 5 40.8 0 0.0 4 29.9 0 0.0 2 27.9 2 0.3 5 46.9 0 0.0 CSS count/size(Kb) 1 9.4 0 0.0 1 7.4 0 0.0 9 23.0 0 0.0 3 12.2 3 0.5 2 5.7 0 0.0 GIF count/size(Kb) 1 1.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 38.8 103.9 3 1.1 12 8.7 12 2.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 JPG count/size(Kb) 10 99.2 0 0.0 8.9 33.7 0 0.0 12 385.8 0 0.0 14 265.9 14 2.0 1 2.2 0 0.0 PNG count/size(Kb) 8 35.4 0 0.0 10 42.9 1 0.3 3 6.7 0 0.0 14 20.1 14 2.6 44 117.5 0 0.0 Loading Time (0ms delay) 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.2 Loading Time (50ms delay) 1.9 0.7 1.4 0.2 1.5 0.2 1.4 0.8 1.6 0.2 Loading Time (100ms delay) 2.8 0.8 2.4 0.3 3.0 0.3 2.3 1.4 2.7 0.2
w MPS M_naver M_daum M-‐gmarket M_samsung auone
First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache) First Second(Cache)
Request Count 28 15 28 5 36 30 18 18 40 28 Sent Kb 9.4 5.8 9.7 1.9 11.8 12.0 5.9 7.0 13.1 11.4 Receive Kb 156.4 17.2 143.0 22.5 506.4 43.1 219.4 12.8 187.1 29.8 HTML count/size(Kb) 2 14.9 2 14.7 4 22.2 3 21.8 1 37.2 1 37.2 2 11.1 2 11.0 1 25.2 1 25.2 JS count/size(Kb) 6 39.2 2 0.4 5 40.5 0 0.0 3 30.1 0 0.0 2 27.0 2 0.2 4 44.2 0 0.0 CSS count/size(Kb) 1 9.5 0 0.0 1 7.4 0 0.0 8 23.1 8 1.5 3 36.7 3 0.4 1 9.5 0 0.0 GIF count/size(Kb) 1 1.9 1 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 10 22.0 9 2.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 JPG count/size(Kb) 9 56.1 1 0.2 5 17.3 0 0.0 12 386.7 12 2.0 10 142.0 10 1.1 1 4.5 0 0.0 PNG count/size(Kb) 7 33.3 7 1.2 11 54.7 0 0.0 2 7.3 0 0.0 1 2.6 1 0.1 27 89.2 21 3.5 Loading Time (0ms delay) 1.1 0.7 0.6 20.0 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.3 Loading Time (50ms delay) 1.9 1.2 1.3 0.7 1.5 0.8 1.4 0.8 1.7 0.8 Loading Time (100ms delay) 2.8 1.7 2.3 1.3 2.6 1.5 2.3 1.4 2.7 1.4
Req No.
6.7% Sent Size
2.6% Receive Size
25.2% Loading Time
0%
Req No.
12.2% Sent Size
4.9% Receive Size
2.5% Loading Time
5.0%
Req No.
47.7% Sent Size
47.5% Receive Size
10.4% Loading Time
14.0%
Req No.
61.7% Sent Size
62.1% Receive Size
35.5% Loading Time
0%
Req No.
32.2% Sent Size
29.3% Receive Size
4.3% Loading Time
0%
Test result of Mobile website
Page 26
Default tuning Aggressive tuning inline more js : 2048 -‐> 20480
inline more image : 2048 -‐> 6000 Req No.
32.2% Sent Size
29.3% Receive Size
4.3% Loading Time
0%
Req No.
47.5% Sent Size
46.3% Receive Size
5.4% Loading Time
28.6%
Mobile site
Experiment by tuning
Page 27
Default tuning
Aggressive tuning fla[en_css_imports :
JpegRecompressionQuality: 100% -‐> 75%
Req No.
61.7% Sent Size
62.1% Receive Size
35.5% Loading Time
0% Req No.
66.1% Sent Size
66.1% Receive Size
66.0% Loading Time
33.7%
Experiment by tuning (Cont’d)
Mobile site
w/o MPS M_samsung
First Second(Cache)
Request Count 47 46 Sent Kb 15.6 18.6 Receive Kb 340.0 8.5 HTML count/size(Kb) 2 5.1 1 0.2 JS count/size(Kb) 2 27.9 2 0.3 CSS count/size(Kb) 3 12.2 3 0.5 GIF count/size(Kb) 12 8.7 12 2.9 JPG count/size(Kb) 14 265.9 14 2.0 PNG count/size(Kb) 14 20.1 14 2.6 Loading Time (0ms delay) 0.5 0.2 Loading Time (50ms delay) 1.4 0.8 Loading Time (100ms delay) 2.3 1.4 118K
Page 28
Image Op9miza9on
Page 29
Background
Image is 61.8% of total size.
Mar 2013 Source : HTTP Archive § The average web page will hit 2 MB by 201
5. § Image is already a significant por9on of we
b page. § 61.8% of total web size is image at Mar 201
3. (826KB/1335KB) § 62.5% at Mar 2012. (630KB/1008KB) § 57.4% at Mar 2011. (445KB/775KB)
Page 30
How to op9mize image § Op9mize image formats § Op9mize image delivery
§ U9lize Browser cache § Use CDN
§ Op9mize image loading process § Lazy loading
§ Op9mize image for mobile § Responsive Images : RWD (Responsive Web Design)
Page 31
Op9mize image formats § GIF § PNG
§ Convert from PNG 24 -‐> 8 § PNG Op9miza9on tools : PNGCrush, Op9PNG
§ JPEG § Control Quality § Remove metadata § Op9miza9on Tools : jpegtran, ImageMagick
§ WebP § a new image format that provides lossless and lossy compression for images
on the web § Lossless WebP 26% smaller than PNG § Lossy WebP 25% ~ 34% smaller than JPEG § Support browser (~26%): Chrome 9+, Android 4+, Opera 12+, Opera Mobile 1
1.1+
Page 32
Image Op9miza9on Item Descrip9on
§ Recompress
§ Recompress JPEG(lossy), PNG, WEBP(lossy) images § compression quality 0~100, -‐1(lossless) (re-‐compressing jpeg and webp images) § Strip color profile informa9on § Strip unnecessary meta-‐data (such as thumbnails) § Reduc9on the color sampling of jpeg images
§ Transforma9on
§ Op9mize GIF image by conver9ng(lossless) to a PNG(except animated gifs) § Conver9ng GIF or PNG image to a jpeg (When it hasn’t alpha channel or transparent pixels)
§ Conver9ng JPEG to WEBP § Transforma9on larger non-‐progressive jpeg images into progressive(fade-‐in) jpegs
§ Image Resizing § image resizing depending on screen size
Page 33
Difference between FEO and Image Opt.
Request h[p://www.foo.com/index.html
Origin FEO (mod_pagespeed)
Request h[p://image.foo.com/a.gif.pagespeed.ic.4f4XMOxRCY.png
Response h[p://image.foo.com/index.html
Origin Image Opt. Request h[p://image.foo.com/a.gif
Response h[p://image.foo.com/a.gif
-‐ MIME TYPE : image/PNG
Request h[p://image.foo.com/a.gif
<html> <script src="js/jquery.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <img src=“a.gif" alt="" width="45" height="44"> </html> <html>
<script src="js/jquery.js.pagespeed.jm.LQy2C9DQIS.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <img src=“a.gif.pagespeed.ic.4f4XMOxRCY.png" alt="" width="45" height="44"> </html>
Response h[p://image.foo.com/a.gif.pagespeed.ic.4f4XMOxRCY.png
HTML Reforma*ng
Content transfo
rma*on
Image transforma*on
Image re-‐encoding from gif to png
Page 34
Difference between FEO and Image Opt.(Cont’d)
Sta9c Image
JS / CSS
Traffic Reduc*on
HTML
Dynamic Image
Sta9c Image
JS / CSS
HTML
Dynamic Image
Sta9c Image
JS / CSS
HTML
Dynamic Image
Traffic Reduc*on
Traffic Reduc*on
Origin’s Web Content By FEO(mod_pagespeed) By Image Op9miza9on
Image op9miza9on
Content Minifica9on
Image op9miza9on
Image op9miza9on
Traffic Reduc*on
Page 35
Experiment of Image Opt. in the field § Experiment of image op9miza9on using mod_pagespeed on real sit
e Origin Data Image Op*miza*on by mod_pagespeed
Total Data Size(Kbyte)
Total Image Size(Kbyte)
Total Data Size(Kbyte)
Total Image Size(Kbyte)
Total Opt. ra9o
Image Opt. ra9o
Processed Image ra9o
PC Naver 1,329.9 346.6 1,262.0 263.6 5.1% 23.9% 50.6%
Daum 1,382.1 278.3 1,309.6 225.6 5.2% 18.9% 26.0%
Gmarket 3,264.8 2,989.5 3,176.9 2,923.9 2.7% 2.2% 10.2%
Samsung 1,125.6 1,003.6 453.1 341.8 59.8% 65.9% 96.6%
Auone 279.5 131.6 228.1 86.4 18.4% 34.4% 95.2%
Mobile Naver 453.9 302.8 456.8 307.4 0.0% -‐1.5% 3.1%
Daum 409.4 314.9 365.8 285.0 10.7% 9.5% 19.0%
Gmarket 869.5 802.7 497.7 439.7 42.8% 45.2% 99.9%
Samsung 368.1 314.7 117.5 64.9 68.1% 79.4% 99.7%
Auone 213.4 132.3 172.9 98.4 19.0% 25.7% 90.5%
§ Processed Image Ra9o = (Processed Image size / Total origin image size) § We can know how much image data can be op9mized.
We can know how much image is op9mized
If op9mize dynamic image, we can reduce more image traffic.
Page 36
Experiment of Image Opt. in the field § Experiment of image op9miza9on in the field
Origin Data mod_pagespeed Image_op*mizer
Total Data Size(KB)
Total Image Size(KB)
Total Data Size(KB)
Total Image Size(KB)
Total Opt. ra9o
Image Opt. ra9o
Processed Image ra9o
Total Data Size(KB)
Total Image Size(KB)
Total Opt. ra9o
Image Opt. ra9o
Processed Image ra9o
PC Naver 1366.9 436.8 1251.9 367.2 8% 16% 73% 1216.4 313.1 11% 28% 98% Daum 1110.6 278.5 1116.8 240.4 -‐1% 14% 88% 1064.5 233.1 4% 16% 86% Gmarket 8244.7 7888.8 7453.9 7124.6 10% 10% 25% 1428.4 1078.9 83% 86% 101% Samsung 6177.1 5396.7 1408.3 627.9 77% 88% 70% 1384.5 603.5 78% 89% 89% Auone 343.5 123.8 302 85.8 12% 31% 90% 305.1 84.7 11% 32% 100% Mobage 606.9 337.2 574.4 314.3 5% 7% 35% 469 211.0 23% 37% 95% Gree 417.7 326.1 420.7 319.1 -‐1% 2% 0% 264.5 173.0 37% 47% 100%
Mobile
Naver 340.1 209.4 321.3 200.1 6% 4% 42% 330.9 200.1 3% 4% 38% Daum 298.9 161.2 283.6 160.9 5% 0% 0% 287.1 149.3 4% 7% 72% Gmarket 2519.3 2368.8 1208.1 1055.3 52% 55% 85% 1183.5 1014.8 53% 57% 87% Samsung 438.5 262.9 229.9 54.3 48% 79% 88% 227.7 52.0 48% 80% 86% Auone 585.9 358.4 531.5 322.2 9% 10% 21% 526.8 299.4 10% 16% 93% Mobage 298 234.6 266.7 205.9 11% 12% 21% 268.7 205.2 10% 13% 100% Gree 387.8 249.6 296.8 173.5 23% 30% 68% 310.7 172.5 20% 31% 88%
§ Processed Image Ra9o = (Total no. of processed image / Total no. of origin image) § We can know how much image data can be op9mized.
Page 37
U9lizing Cache Server
origin Image Opt. Cache client
Service Flow
h[p://www.foo.com/a.png Cache-‐miss h[p://www.foo.com/a.png
h[p://www.foo.com/a.png
Content-‐Type : Image/PNG : a.png
Image convert : PNG -‐> JPEG
Content-‐Type : Image/JPEG : a.png
Cache-‐fill Content-‐Type : Image/JPEG : a.png
h[p://www.foo.com/a.png
Content-‐Type : Image/JPEG : a.png Cache-‐hit
§ Image op9miza9on is very CPU-‐intensive job. To alleviate load, it’s be[er to u9lize cache server between client and image op9miza9on.
Page 38
Performance of FEO and Image Op9miza9on
Page 39
INTERNET
Test Environment
Origin Web
Gomez Agent
KR
Cdnetworks Cache POP
Gomez Agent in CA
US 2. Accelera9on of dynamic content by CDNW DWA
Gomez Agent
UK Singapore
CDNW POP at Dallas, US
Origin loca9on : Dallas, US MIO & MOD loca9on : Dallas, US CDNW Shield loca9on : Chicago, US
MIO MOD
MIO : mod image op9mizer MOD : mod page speed
Page 40
Performance Comparison
Gomez Agent origin 1. between gomez agent and origin
2. between gomez agent and MIO
3. between gomez agent and CDNW DWA
4. between gomez agent and CDNW DWA + MOD
5. between gomez agent and CDNW DWA + MIO
Web Contents for PC & Mobile
Test scenario Test case
CDNW EDGE CDNW SHIELD
MIO
MIO
MOD
Page 41
Performance Test using Gomez PC Agent § Gomez Agent loca9ons
§ All : San Jose, Atlanta, New York, Seoul, Tokyo, Madrid, London
§ Using Gomez FireFox Agent § 1. origin & 4.DWA
§ Total Objects : 195 § Total Bytes : 1004KB
§ 6. DWA+MOD § Total Objects : 49 § Total Bytes : 652KB
§ 7. DWA+MIO § Total Objects : 195 § Total Bytes : 518KB
§ Gomez UA String § Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0
; GomezAgent 3.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1
4 3 1 2
Page 42
Performance Test using Gomez Mobile Agent § Gomez Agent loca9ons
§ All: Tokyo, Seoul, London, New York, Santa Clara
§ Using Gomez Mobile Agent § 1. origin & 4. DWA
§ Total Objects : 41 § Total Bytes : 323.3KB
§ 6. DWA+MPS(mod_pagespeed) § Total Objects : 28 § Total Bytes : 188.4KB
§ 7. DWA+MIO § Total Objects : 41 § Total Bytes : 146.5KB
§ Gomez UA String § Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW6
4; rv:13.0; GomezRecorder 5.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1
4 3 1 2
Page 43
Mobile CDN
Page 44
Introduc9on § Mobile operators needs :
§ Deliver be[er QoE to customers § Network op9miza9on
§ Alleviate mobile traffic conges9on
§ Reduce traffic and costs of OTT Content § Save interna9onal transit traffic
§ Generate new revenue
Page 45
What is Mobile CDN § Op9mize the delivery of content to end users on any type of wirele
ss or mobile network. § Mobile CDN is important for MNOs (Mobile Network Operator) as t
hey can lead to significant savings and avoid network conges9on. § Provide be[er UX (User Experience) and traffic reduc9on
Page 46
Loca9on of CDN inside the mobile network § To get op9mal reduc9on and accelera9on, the CDN is placed inside
the mobile network on top of the PGW func9on.
Internet
PGW
eNB eNB eNB eNB eNB eNB eNB eNB eNB
SGW SGW SGW
IP Core
LTE Core
Mail Web ・・・ traffic is reduced to 1/10
-‐ Video pacing
-‐ Text Compression
-‐ Image Op*miza*on
-‐ TCP Accelera*on
In case of LTE
NAT Cache Edge
inside
Mobile NW
* Network Address Translator
* Primary Gateway
* Secondary Gateway
Page 47
Video Pacing § Video pacing controls the bandwidth for progressive download video. § This reduces excessive video download
With Video Pacing Without Video Pacing Burst sec*on
Media’s bitrate Smooth sec*on
Page 48
Conclusion
Page 49
Conclusion
QoE
[L4 improvement] TCP (Transport-‐level)Op*miza*on
[L5 improvement] Adopt SPDY/RE Technology HTTP (Session-‐level) op*miza*on
[L6 improvement] Adopt FEO Technology HTML (Presenta*on-‐level) Op*miza*on
[L7 improvement] Content Op*miza*on Video Pacing, Image Op*miza*on and etc.
[L1-‐L3 improvement] Adopt CDN (beZer performance than ISP N/W)
• To reduce latency on mobile network, place content closer to end-‐user. To do so, u9lize CDN. Also can accelerate middle mile.
• Tune TCP depending on network type (3G/LTE/Wired).
• FEO provides be[er QoE. And tune FEO focused on display 9me, not network download 9me.
• Op9mize image. As reducing image size, can reduce traffic and provide be[er QoE.
The more QoE is improved, the more revenue is increased
Page 50
Q & A