Re: Adaptation field use in ULE / MPG2-TS specification

[Tor Brekke <tor.brekke@nbs.nera.no>]

I believe we are talking about two different
levels of signalling here. I am concerned about using ULE over systems
which use the MPG2-TS adaptation field for system internal purposes. The
way the ULE draft is formulated this will be impossible. 

The use of ULE extension headers can
not replace this signalling since it would require updates to already existing
standards. In addition the headers are really on a completely different
level since they are bound to an ULE packet. The adaptation field is part
of the MPG layer. Signalling at this level should be independent of whether
he MPG payload is ULE, MPE, SI, nothing (!)  or something else. 

I hope this has helped to clarify the
concerns we have. 

Regards
Tor