Peer-to-peer for content delivery for IPTV services: analysis of mechanisms and NGN impacts

Just found this document here which is a (first) draft of ETSI TISPAN's work in the area of P2P television. It seems that P2P is becoming a major issue for standardization:

• IETF has mainly ALTO and P2PSIP working groups but also P2P streaming is pushing "on the market."
• DVB recently released an Internet TV questionnaire which has some P2P aspects.
  
• W3C had some P2P activity in the past but now it seems to be silent with respect to this topic. Maybe the situation changes in the future...
  
• MPEG provides the baseline technologies (codecs and file formats) but also started an exploration activity towards an Advanced IPTV Terminal (AIT), probably jointly with ITU-T.

The future will show us which of these activites will be successful and I'd like to close with a quote that fits here very well, i.e., "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from". --Andrew S. Tanenbaum

Let me know in case something is missing or wrong.

MPEG news: a report from the 87th meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland

MPEG’s high-performance video coding (HVC) standard is evolving and currently targets mobile devices, IPTV, and Ultra-HD. However, the trade-off between coding efficiency and codec complexity is still driving the thresholds which has been set at this meeting, well, at least initially. For low-complexity HVC is seeking for 25% gain in coding efficiency and for full-/increased-complexity the threshold is set to 50% gain in coding efficiency (cf. goal for AVC standardization). The application scenarios range from shared Ultra-HD to personalized experiences. The latter is targeting a viewing distance of 0.5*h (i.e., 50cm) and for personal use only. A vision document (N10361) has been issued at this meeting and interested parties are requested to join the Ad-hoc Group (AhG) for further discussions (N10371). One open issue with HVC is whether and how audio will adapt to these new developments, probably with high-performance audio coding (HAC) or can HE-AAC already complement HVC? Anyway, short viewing distance ultimately leads to short listening distances and a wide angle for the sound stage...

3D video coding (3DVC) has already a history within MPEG. A vision document has been produced here stating that MPEG’s version of 3D video shall be compatible with existing standards, mono/stereo devices, and existing/planned infrastructure. While the former seems to be very clear, i.e., backwards compatibility to AVC is desirable in the same way as it was for SVC, the latter needs some more discussions. How can one be compatible with planned infrastructures?

In the area of advanced IPTV terminal (AIT) we had a productive meeting with ITU-T SG16 Q.13. The objectives look very promising and aim to increase the user experience thanks to the usage of latest media coding, transport, and processing technologies. An AhG has been set up to discuss the details. Again, AhGs are open to the public and everyone can join and contribute.

The information exchange with virtual worlds (MPEG-V) has merged with the representation of sensory effects (RoSE) and will be now jointly developed under the umbrella of MPEG-V. However, it was sought that ‘information exchange with virtual worlds’ is no longer appropriate and they’re seeking for a new name. Any inputs are welcome and are discussed within the AhG that is open to everybody. Thus, join this exciting activity now! In its current working draft the following sensory effects are defined which shall create an enhanced, immersive user experience: various light effects, temperature, wind, vibration, water sprayer, perfumer/scent, fog, window blind/shadow, sound, and color correction.

Finally, MPEG got another Emmy, the "Technology and Engineering Emmy Award 2007-2008" for MPEG-4 AVC from the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (NATAS). It seems that success within MPEG is from now on measured in terms of number of awards received ;-) And last but not least, if you’ve been ever interested in the MPEG vision, you may find it here.

MPEG news: a report from the 85th meeting in Busan, Korea

A lot of interesting things happened here and I'd like to report on three topics:

• MPEG RoSE
• Advanced IPTV Terminal
• High-performance Video Coding
  

MPEG RoSE: At this meeting we've issued the second version of the WD which will be publicly available and, thus, I can provide a more detailed overview here. I've also updated my slides from the last meeting which now can be found on SlideShare. The aim of RoSE to extend the traditional A/V content consumption to the dimension of sensory effects which are referred to as "an effect to augment perception by stimulating human senses in a particular scene of a multimedia application". With that definition in mind, sensory effects are composed by following the structure of the Sensory Effect Description Language (SEDL) and making use of terms (actually, effect types) of the Sensory Effect Vocabulary (SEV).

Sensory Effect Description Language (SEDL): Provides basic building blocks (declaration, effects, group of effects, reference to effects, parameters), common attributes (timing, priority, intensity, etc.), and data types (void at the moment) for constructing/authoring sensory effect metadata which is associated to A/V content.

Sensory Effect Vocabulary (SEV): Provides a clear set of extensible effect types which are currently comprising effects for color (illumination), temperature (°C), wind (Beaufort), and vibration (Richter).

It is foreseen that the sensory effect metadata which comes along with the A/V content is translated (or mapped or adapted) - by a module (hw/sw) called RoSE engine - to commands that are understood by so-called sensory devices with certain capabilities. Both commands and capabilities are also within the scope of standardization. Hence, it should be possible to consume the A/V content timely synchronized with its effects for an increased user experience. Furthermore, user preferences might also affect this translation/mapping/adaptation process.

Advanced IPTV Terminal: This activity is about to define a terminal suitable for IPTV scenarios jointly with ITU which may result in a similar construction as the JVT for video coding standardization. However, nothing has been fixed yet and interested parties are invited to join the discussions via the corresponding Ad-hoc Group (AhG) [subscribe]with the following mandates:

1. Look after the process of establishing the joint project with ITU-T so that SG16 may presented with a matured proposal for a new standard for Advanced IPTV Terminal
2. Gather use case scenarios and requirements for Advanced IPTV Terminal
3. Conduct collaboration with ITU-T Q.13/16 to prepare a joint meeting

High-performance Video Coding: I've already reported on that in previous blog posts, see part one and two for details.

Finally, MPEG got an Emmy! ;-)

Announcement for a Joint Meeting on IPTV between MPEG and ITU-T Q.13/16

Announcement for a Joint Meeting on IPTV between MPEG and ITU-T Q.13/16 Saturday and Sunday, October 11-12, in Busan, Korea, collocated with the 86th MPEG meeting.

The purpose of this joint meeting, as stated in the liaison letter to ITU-T Q.13/16, w10090, at the last MPEG meeting, is to understand the ITU-T IPTV requirements and services scenarios, and to ensure that the three recommended MPEG technologies (BiFS, LASeR, and MXM) and any other MPEG technologies (such as those related to metadata, digital items and licenses) can, or can be profiled to, meet the ITU-T IPTV requirements and implement ITU-T IPTV service scenarios.

Schedule:
Saturday October 11, 10am-1pm and 2pm-5pm
Sunday October 12, 10am-1am

Location:
Same location as MPEG meets. Check with the registration desk for the meeting room information.

Note that Q.13/16 will have their own meeting on Friday October 10 and possibly Sunday October 12.