RE: FINAL CALL for Feedback on Charter

["Allison, Art" <AAllison@nab.org>]

See embedded.

Art
::{)
Art Allison
Director Advanced Engineering
NAB
1771 N St NW
Washington DC 20036
202 429 5418


-----Original Message-----
From: Gorry Fairhurst [mailto:gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 11:06 AM
To: ip-dvb@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Subject: Re: FINAL CALL for Feedback on Charter


On 26/11/03 2:03 pm, "Allison, Art" <AAllison@nab.org> wrote:

> The charter's focus on IP over MPEG-2 being DVB centric is very
troublesome.

Where does it say it is DVB-based (it shouldn't)?
AA> The sentence "The specific focus of the group is on the use of MPEG-2
transport (examples include the Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) standards:
DVB-RCS; DVB-S and DVB-T) in next generation networks and is not concerned
with the development, replacement, or retention of existing protocols on the
existing generation of networks. " seems to so imply, as no scope
requirement to make the solution work on any other transport is mentioned.
//
- The DVB examples in  para 1 were brought to the mailing list, if you wish
to add other examples of IP over ATSC, then please do suggest some....

The reference in the second para should include to A/93, as that is the IP
specific standard (A/90 is even more ATSC specific and maps very closely at
the encapsulation layer to ETSI's)

> Certainly the developed method should enable IP over DVB-flavored
> Transports. However, as an international standard, it should enable IP
over
> all flavors of transport, and not discriminate against other flavors.
ATSC,
> ISDB and other systems (China's) should be enabled as well.  A generic
> solution abstracted from the details of transport would seem to have a
much
> larger marketplace.
> 
> I note that delivery of IP over MPEG-2 has been solved for the ATSC

- Good, we'd particularly welcome your experience, especially if you can
contribute experience for using IPv6, especially autoconfiguration.

> transport, and while the standard is tied to ATSC announcement, that tie
> could be abstracted, as it is not the heart of the technology. The IP
> therein is a technically separable layer. The essence of the standard is
how
> to deal with the one-way issues that contrast IP over broadcast vs. two
way
> over the internet.
> 
> See http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_92.pdf
> 
> The current scope seems to be one of requiring re-inventing the wheel, and
> being narrow while doing so... perhaps a broader view would better serve
the
> world.

By broader do you mean not specific to ATSC;DVB; etc?

AA>> Correct, over DVB would be one important instance, which can show how
an abstracted solution may be employed, and perhaps as there is much
interest in making sure that instance is workable; it may be the first such
instance verification.
> Art
> ::{)
> Art Allison
> Director Advanced Engineering
> NAB
> 1771 N St NW
> Washington DC 20036
> 202 429 5418
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----


<snip>