Spring MOSP - MSE Studio by liuhongmeiyes


									                       Trinity Team

Middle of Semester Presentation
                      Mar 10, 2006

                          Minho Jeung
                         Eunyoung Cho
                              Kyu Hou

      ▪ Introduction
           - Team Introduction
           - Project Introduction
           - Project Overview
      ▪   Physical System Picture
      ▪   Architecture
      ▪   Schedule Overview
      ▪   Current Status
      ▪   Postmortem
      ▪   Top 5 Risks
      ▪   Questions to Mentors
Team Introduction (1)

• Team Members & Role
  Minho Jeung      Team leader, Risk manager
  Eunyoung Cho     Development manager, Customer interface manager
  Kyu Hou          Process manager, Quality manager, Planning manager

• Mentors                      • Client
 - Mel Rosso-Llopart (CMU)       - POSDATA: SI Company in KOREA
 - Ho-jin Choi (ICU)             - Contact point: Seong-yong Choi
 - In-Young Ko (ICU)

• Team Strength                • Team Weakness
 - Cohesive Teamwork              - Work hard → Work smart

Team Introduction (2)
• Team Goal in spring 2006 semester
 - Self-confidence in the studio project

                 Goal                             Measurement
  Completion of SOW and SRS          SOW and SRS signed by our client
                                     High level design
  Designing architecture
                                     Low level design

  Preparation for development        Experiment

                                     Postmortem of our client
  Satisfaction on project progress
                                     Success criteria >=4.0 (1:low - 5:high)

Project Introduction
 • Project Name
  OMP (Overlay Multicast Protocol)
  New Project launched in December 20, 2005

 • Business Drivers
   POSDATA wants to develop N-DVR (Next generation Digital Video
   Recorder) system.
    ▪ N-DVR can address the limitation of network bandwidth
    ▪ Royalty-free OMP

Physical System Picture

                POS-Watch TX

                                   N-DVR Server


                    Video stream              Broadcasting
       Camera       transmission   Internet   stream             Viewer   Client


                         Server                                                                     Client
                                          Node                                    Node                  Node       Child node
                                       configuration                           configuration         Information    checker

                   Node Information
                                        Child node


      Digital                             Stream                                   Stream                           Stream
      video                                                                                           Stream
                                          sender                                   receiver                         sender
                      Stream storage



   Digital Video       Physical          Video Stream               Node
                                         transmission                                     process      memory
    converter          Boundary                                  information                                       storage

Schedule Overview
              2006                 Activities                  Cycle
              2005   - Revise Proposal Documents
                     - Completion of SOW (v1.0)
                     - Completion of SRS (v1.0)                Cycle 1
              Feb    - Completion of SPMP (V1.0)

                     - Development Plan
Here we are
              Mar                            Spring break

                     - High / Low level design
              Apr    - Test plan                               Cycle 2
                     - Experiment                              Design
                     - Requirement traceability

              June   - Implementation
                     - Unit test                                Cycle 3
                     - System test                          Implementation
              Aug    - Delivery

Current Status
• What has been done

                      SOW *            SRS *           SPMP

        Client Meeting                                    Q&A with Experts
                           Weekly Status Meeting Paper                     Development
     (2 hours per week)                                    (CMU,ICU,ETRI)
                            - Meeting minutes    Research                     Plan
  - Client meeting minutes                                - Email response

        Short Term (Biweekly) Project Plan / Risk Management

              Average 20+ hours per week / Each member

 * SOW and SRS were sent to our client. (The client is reviewing now)

 • The goal of Cycle 1
   - Completion of SOW, SRS and SPMP
   - Make Development Plan
   - Client Satisfaction on project progress
 • Evaluation
   - SOW, SRS and SPMP were made.
   - Development Plan was made.
   - Client postmortem >=4.0
 • Postmortem of Meetings
       -Status Meeting                  -Client Meeting

         Date     Team                     Date     Client       Team
        Jan. 27    4.3                    Feb. 6      5            3.7
        Jan. 31    3.7                    Feb. 13     5             4
        Feb. 8     4.3                    Feb. 20     5             4

        Feb. 13    4                      Feb. 27     5             4

        Feb. 20    3.3                    Mar. 6     4.6           4.3

        Feb. 27    4.3
                                                           (1:low - 5:high)
        Mar. 6     4.7
Top 5 Risks
R09. Ambiguous Requirements
• Initiation by team                                SRS
R01. Lack of Domain Knowledge

                                                    Summary papers and Q&A sessions within team
• Study on the overlay multicast
                                                    & with expert.
• Q & A with domain experts
                                                    Post Mortem based on the Development Plan

R06. Inefficient Communication with Remote Client
▪ Conference call                                   Weekly meeting minutes client's post mortem
▪ Communication facilities of ICU

R04. Team is busy with core courses

▪ Studio works on weekend
                                                    Weekly time log sheet
▪ Reflection based on time log
R03. Team members are not familiar with network programming

▪ Practice network programming                      Experiment

                                   -   RISK
                                       Mitigation    Measurement
Questions to Mentors

 - How do we conduct QAW, when our client doesn’t want
   to participate in it and he can not attend it?

 - How can we balance course work (MSE curriculum
   subjects) with studio?

 - How do we overcome the difficulty of gaining domain
   knowledge on our project?
   (It’s hard to get training on the domain. We are using Q&A
   with ICU expert as a way to gain domain knowledge.)

Thank you!

 Top 5 Risks

                                                                       Probab     Time
ID         Risk                  Mitigation Plan            Impact                          Evaluation
                                                                         ility   frame

                        ▪ Make SOW and SRS based on
      Ambiguous           team's research in advance
R09                                                         Critical    High     Short   SRS
      requirements      ▪ Reference existing products or
                          specifications of protocol

      Lack of Domain    • Study on the overlay multicast                                 Summary Paper
R01                                                         Critical    High     Short
      Knowledge         • Q & A with domain experts                                      and Q&A session

      Communication     ▪ Conference call                                                Weekly meeting
R06                                                         Marginal    High     Short
      problem           ▪ Communication facilities of ICU                                minutes

      Balance           ▪ Studio works on weekend
R04   between course                                        Critical    High     Short   Weekly time log
      work and class    ▪ Reflection based on time log

      Lack of network
R03                     ▪ Practice network programming      Critical    High     Long    Experiment

What has to be done

        Date                                        Activities
    Dec. 20, 2005        - Overview two alternatives
    Dec. 22, 2005        - Decide new project

    Dec. 23, 2005        - Meet RMCP experts at ETRI
    Dec. 28, 2005        - Consult with Ph. D student at ICU about new project
    Dec. 29, 2005        - Elaborate on requirements
                         - Discuss communication method during spring semester
    Jan. 6, 2006~        - Survey current multicast overlay protocol
                            ( RMCP, NICE, ESM, commercial solutions )
•    RMCP : Relayed Multi-cast Protocol
•    ETRI : Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
•    NICE : Internet Cooperative Environment
•    ESM : End-System Multicast

Unicast vs. Overlay Multicast

            Unicast                                  Overlay Multicast

     Client          Client                              Client             Client

                                 Overload                                                  Less
   Client                                             Client

  Client                            Server
                                                                   More responsibility        Server

                                Network Connection        Router
            Client     Server                                        Broadcasting stream

Member Management

              Request for join
         Inform nearest node


                        Network               Request for Join   Reply
      Client   Server                Router                              Internet
  Date         Client    Team                    Reason

Feb. 6           5       3.7     Uncertainty, meeting time
Feb. 13          5        4      Elaboration of requirements
Feb. 20          5        4      Better information, meeting time
Feb. 27          5        4      Meeting time
Mar. 6          4.6      4.3     Meeting method, Detailed questions

   • Questions to our client (From March on)
         Q1. Satisfaction on meeting
         Q2. Satisfaction on requirements
         Q3. ICU mentor’s participation
         Q4. Satisfaction on decision
         Q5. Action items

Quality Attributes
   -The performance factor is most important criteria that the project team should meet. The
       detail performance requirements are as followed.
   -The client should be able to watch the video stream within 5 seconds of the request for
       the stream.
   -If a user using unicast protocol can get a video stream in a second, the result using
         overlay mulicast should be less then 2 second (latency).

   -The routing management supports user-friendly way to manage the current group and
       group members' information.
   -Current group and members' information should be shown.
   -Group or member changes are done automatically so the server administrator does not
       need to handle the situation manually.

   -As long as network works and there is no configuration change during multicast, the
       video stream should be transmitted to end user without disconnection.

   -Only registered clients can use Overly Multicast protocol
   -The transmitted data should be encrypted so that no one can access the resource.

To top