Video over IP Activity Group Report and Meeting Video Services Forum October 1, 2001 New Orleans, LA
Video over IP AG Progress to Date • Developed draft mission statement • Still a little work to do • Researched applicable IETF RFCs • Info to be distributed • Presentation made to ANSI T1A1.3 Committee in July regarding progress • T1A1.3 posting on “High Speed Video” over IP • Presentation to T1A1.3 in September • Authorized to write appendix to ANSI Y.1541 document
Draft Mission Statement • Identify the issues pertaining to sending and receiving contribution-quality, real-time, latency-sensitive digital television signals across multicarrier, IP-based networks, and develop the Video Services Forum position on such issues as are identified.
Mission Statement Controversy • How high in the protocol stack to go? • Layer 2 & 3 for certain • Layer 4 or higher? • Which Layer 3 protocol(s)? • If Layer 4, which protocols? • RTP • DCP • new • Require MPLS/RSVP/DiffServ or not? • Prove interoperability on future networks…MPLS isn’t complete yet
Other Mission Statement Observations • Distinguish between short-latencey and very-short-latency apps • Short-latency would be less than 500ms for one-way contribution video feeds • Very-short-latency would be less than 250ms for two-way video such as interviews • May be difficult to achieve • RTP encapsulation of CCIR-601 has an IETF spec (draft-ietf-avt-smpte292-video-03.txt) • More efficient if separated out Anc Data and moved it over its own synchronized path • Requires a new IETF spec
Additional Video over IP concerns • Forward Error Correction • Can a generic FEC be applied? How strong an FEC is required vs. additional latency? • Need FEC experts in the group • Network-based genlocking • Requires new protocols • Create a set of requirements for isochronous system behavior
T1A1.3 Activity • John Grigg and Steve Storozum at Sept. meeting of IP QoS Performance WG • Presented argument for considering high-bandwidth video for a separate class of service • Argument rejected • Too late in process • More top-down analysis needed • Video performance requires what level of IP QoS? • However….
Video over IP WG Receives T1A1.3 Work Request! • Invited to author an appendix to pending ITU Y.1541 document detailing requirements • If enough evidence is presented, high-speed video can be incorporated in body of document on next revision • Window of opportunity • If appendix is submitted by December, it will be published along with Y.1541 first release • Otherwise, will have to wait until October 2002 for next chance
What is needed? • Empirical results of video over IP QoS testing • Testing to be conducted in a fair, vendor-independent fashion • Authoring the appendix around this testing will be required • All preferably in the next 45 days
Next steps for Video over IP AG • Final mission statement agreement • Author and issue Request for Technology to meet requirements in mission statement • Conduct tests on equipment and networks proposed as responses to RFT • Write final report on testing with recommendations for VSF position on Video over IP