Re: FINAL CALL for Feedback on Charter

["HDClausen" <clausen@cosy.sbg.ac.at>]

Gorry,

I think Art Allison is raising a valid point.
The IP encapsulation is on top of the MPEG-2 TS layer and has absolutely
nothing to do with any DVB-specific standards concerning modulation or
signal shaping etc. - and these are some of the major differences between
ATSC and DVB.
However, as soon as we start looking at specific tables and entries,
differences become noticeable.

I guess we can come up with a reasonable encapsulation scheme which is
MPEG-2 based and look for more generic solutions for the necessarily(?)
specific tables and entries.

A different story is DVB-RCS which is currently offering an MPEG-2/TS packet
based and an ATM-cell based alternative which might both not be ideal for an
interaction channel.

--Horst Clausen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gorry Fairhurst" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: <ip-dvb@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 8:06 AM
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)?
>
> - 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....
>
> > 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?
>
> > Art
> > ::{)
> > Art Allison
> > Director Advanced Engineering
> > NAB
> > 1771 N St NW
> > Washington DC 20036
> > 202 429 5418
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
>
>
> <snip>
>