RE: ULE over DVB-H

[<Rod.Walsh@nokia.com>]

ULE offers bandwidth savings which are very nice for small packets.
Small packets such as those in the bi-directional unicast signalling
protocols which were used as examples to justify the chartering of
IPDVB. <Yes, it is understood that in the intended ULE cases
"bi-directional" = "2*unidirectonal">

For large packets, the justification to use ULE over MPE is academic and
not commerical - it will not fly without some additional, non technical,
change. I have nothing against ULE - it's rather good - but making the
wrong assumptions about the commercial viability of such a change from
MPE would lead to a lot of misdirection and wasted effort. We don't need
to be experts of standardisation to have an elementary grasp of the
TCP/SCTP, UDP/DCCP, Radius/Diameter and IPv4/IPv6 deployment issues
where the domain is the public Internet - exactly IETF scope. Since
DVB-xxx domain tends not to be public Internet, it seems there are more,
not less, issues to trouble a MP->UL transition.

IPDVB was chartered as the use cases were different from DVB. When they
become the same, there's a competition and I'm not IPDVB has the level
of commercial participation to make a mark or server the Internet
community.

Since this is the heartland of ULE, I'll stop my advice on general
uptake of ULE and cause no more heartburn (i.e. I assume that the issues
are clear and I don't need to make myself any less popular in IPDVB :(

Cheers, Rod.