Re: MPE, is it necessary?

[Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>]

on 26/3/02 6:26 am, Rod.Walsh@nokia.com at Rod.Walsh@nokia.com wrote:

> Gorry:
>> I'd argue it is inefficient (especially in terms of header processing)
> 
> Do you have a report on this subject: experimental or simulated evidence?
> 

The ip-dvb site has a copy of a report from Skysteam and the header byte
overhead:

http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/ip-dvb/refs/mpe-ohead.pdf

The requirements ID also provides some of the rationale for adopting a more
lightweight (fewer header fields) encapsulation:
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fair-ipdvb-req-00.txt

>> i want ask him, if i put directly IP packets in MPEG TP, and
> 
> Do you mean using the "data piping" option of DVB standards?

The requirements ID calls for a new encapsulation method, which we intend to
discuss on this list. So far, I have received input from the University of
Saltzburg with one proposed protocol, which could be developed to fit the
requirements. This should appear as an ID in early April.

Do your requirements for encapsulation differ (or agree) with those
expressed in version -00 of the requirements ID?

<<snip>>

Gorry