Subject: code point for ULE

From: Bernhard Collini-Nocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:32:44 +0100

Dear list members,

the ipdvb wg chairperson has asked to start a discussion on the topic of 
a reasonable code point to identify an ULE "stream" in an MPEG-2 
transport multiplex.

Let me start the discussion with a proposal for two approaches:

A1. go for DVB-SI and include the data_broadcast_id for ULE in the 
data_broadcast_descriptor() in PMT. There has been advise by the 
chairman of the DVB-GBS group that such an ULE id could be self 
registered on the DVB website. However, a responsible person an 
organisation (likely a DVB member) needs to be named.

Q1.1: who should/would be the registrar?
Q1.2: would it then ALSO be OK/neccessary to request to
ARIB and ATSC?
Q1.3: should the id be similar or identical among the standards?

A2. go for MPEG-2 PSI and request a stream_type for ULE to be included 
in the PMT. However, to my current knowledge "a registration in the 
official area is not foreseen as long as no commercial requirements are 
present".
Q2.1: is anyone willing/interested to sum up commercial requirements for 
having ULE as "standard" stream type and can raise this issue in the 
releveant standardization body?
Q2.2: if approach 1 is easier to achieve should approach 2 still be 
followed?

In my view both approaches can be followed in parallel and there is no 
need to do one exclusively.

What is your opinion? Any other approaches that should be taken into 
cosnideration? Any concerns with one or all of the approaches?

Regards,
Bernhard

---

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:28:51 -0600

Thanks, Bernhard,

Your email has a good set of questions. We will need to find answers to all
of these questions.

I'd like to know the feeling of others in the ipdvb working group on this -
we need to ensure that the allocations are good for a range of MPEG-2
systems, and that we do the correct thing.

Several of these questions (see ***) will determine WHERE the code points
are registered, can we try to answer these first?

Gorry

> Q1.2: would it then ALSO be OK/neccessary to request to

*** I'm keen to hear people who have experience with organisations other
than DVB to speak about this.

> need to do one exclusively.

*** I'm keen to hear people's understanding.

> cosnideration? Any concerns with one or all of the approaches?

*** I'm also keen to hear people speak about this one.

---

From: Michael A Dolan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:33:35 -0800

Option 1 is incomplete since you still need *some* stream_type since the 
payload is otherwise undefined.  Plus, even if made complete, this is 
DVB-centric and thus not helpful for ATSC and ARIB, which would have to do 
it their own way.

Option 2, unless JVT has recently changed its policy of only assigning 
values for ISO-defined streams, is not an option (unless of course you take 
this design to JVT and get it published as an ISO standard, but that's a 
lot harder than the other options).

Regards,

         Mike

At 3/11/2005 08:32 AM, Bernhard Collini-Nocker wrote:
>Dear list members,
>
>the ipdvb wg chairperson has asked to start a discussion on the topic of a 
>reasonable code point to identify an ULE "stream" in an MPEG-2 transport 
>multiplex.
>
>data_broadcast_descriptor() in PMT. There has been advise by the chairman 
>of the DVB-GBS group that such an ULE id could be self registered on the 
>DVB website. However, a responsible person an organisation (likely a DVB 
>member) needs to be named.
>
>A2. go for MPEG-2 PSI and request a stream_type for ULE to be included in 
>the PMT. However, to my current knowledge "a registration in the official 
>area is not foreseen as long as no commercial requirements are present".
>Q2.2: if approach 1 is easier to achieve should approach 2 still be followed?
>