[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Seoul

John,
We are still not an IETF working group, but there has been progress behind the scenes.
A proposed charter for this WG was circulated by the IESG to the IETF and Internet Area Chairs before the last Minneapolis IETF meeting. There was some feedback that we have been working to address resulting in the latest version of our proposed charter text below. We're still working to tune the milestones, etc. but I am expecting that this charter will be submited to the IESG for consideration at their next meeting on 22-Jan. We've had BoFs at the previous two IETFs. I am undecided about the need to call a meeting in Seoul (so if *anyone* has views, please do tell the list). It seems we are making progress with the ULE Spec, and that the requirements document is now in a position where the WG could offer comments and suggestions.
If there is a need to meet, I'd be very willing to ask for a meeting slot, but obviously not all groups can meet at every IETF (there simply wouldn't be space), so the question is I guess, are there issues that need to be discussed, agenda items, or new inputs that we can expect in the next month? 

Gorry

-------


IP over MPEG-2/DVB (ipdvb)

Chair(s):
Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>

Responsible Area Director:
Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion:  ip-dvb@erg.abdn.ac.uk
To subscribe:        subscribe ip-dvb at majordomo@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Archive:             http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ip-dvb/archive/

Description of Working Group:
The WG will develop new protocols and architectures to enable better
deployment of IP over MPEG-2 transport and provide easier interworking
with IP networks. Specific properties of this subnetwork technology
include link-layer support for unicast and multicast, large numbers
of down-stream receivers, and efficiency of transmission. These
properties resemble those in some other wireless networks. The specific
ndards: DVB-RCS; DVB-S and DVB-T and related ATSC Specifications) in
protocols on the existing generation of networks.

The WG will endeavour to reuse existing open standard technologies,
giving guidance on usage in IP networks, whenever they are able to
fulfil requirements. For instance, it acknowledges the existing
Multiprotocol Encapsulation (MPE) [ATSC A/90;ETSI EN 301192] and that
this will continue to be deployed in the future to develop new markets.
Any alternative encapsulation would need to co-exist with MPE.

Appropriate standards will be defined to support transmission of IPv4
and IPv6 datagrams between IP networks connected using MPEG-2 transport
subnetworks. This includes options for encapsulation, dynamic unicast
address resolution for IPv4/IPv6, and the mechanisms needed to map
routed IP multicast traffic to the MPEG-2 transport subnetwork. The
standards will be appropriate to both MPE and any alternative
encapsulation method developed. The developed protocols may also be
applicable to other multicast enabled subnetwork technologies supporting
large numbers of directly connected systems.

The current list of work items is:
Specify the requirements and architecture for supporting IPv4/IPv6 via
MPEG-2 transmission networks. Such requirements should consider the range
of platforms currently (or anticipated to be) in use. This draft will be
an Informational RFC.

Define a standards-track RFC defining an efficient encapsulation method.
The design will consider the need for MAC addresses, the potential need
for synchronisation between streams, support for a wide range of IPv4/IPv6
and multicast traffic.

Provide an Informational RFC describing a framework for unicast and
multicast address resolution over MPEG-2 transmission networks. The
document will describe options for the address resolution process,
relating these to appropriate usage scenarios and suggesting appropriate
protocol mechanisms for both the existing Multi-Protocol Encapsulation
(MPE) and the efficient encapsulation (2). Consideration will be paid to
existing standards, and the cases for IPv6 and IPv4 will be described.

Define standards-track RFC(s) to specify procedures for dynamic address
resolution for IPv4/IPv6. This will describe the protocol and syntax of
the information exchanged to bind unicast and multicast flows to the MPEG-2
TS Logical Channels. This will include specific optimisations appropriate for 
networks reaching large numbers of down-stream systems.

Goals and Milestones:

JAN 04    Draft of a WG Architecture ID describing usage of MPEG-2
         transport for IP transmission.
MAR 04    Draft of a WG ID on the new Encapsulation.
JUL 04    Draft of a WG ID on the AR Framework, specifying mechanisms
         to perform address resolution.
JUL 04    Submit Architecture to IESG
OCT 04    Draft of a WG ID or the AR Protocol, defining a protocol to
         perform IP address resolution.
OCT 04    Submit Encapsulation to IESG
APR 05    Submit AR Framework to IESG
AUG 05    Submit AR Protocol to IESG
AUG 05    Progress the Encapsulation RFC along the IETF standards track.