IP over DVB (ipdvb)
-------------------

 Charter
 Last Modified: 2007-01-30

 Current Status: Active Working Group

 Chair(s):
     Gorry Fairhurst  <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>

 Internet Area Director(s):
     Jari Arkko  <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
     Mark Townsley  <townsley@cisco.com>

 Internet Area Advisor:
     Mark Townsley  <townsley@cisco.com>

 Mailing Lists: 
     General Discussion:ipdvb@erg.abdn.ac.uk
     To Subscribe:      majordomo@erg.abdn.ac.uk
         In Body:       subscribe ipdvb at majordomo@erg.abdn.ac.uk
     Archive:           http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ipdvb/archive/

Description of Working Group:

The WG will develop new protocols and architectures to enable better 
deployment of IP over MPEG-2 transport and provide easier interworking 
with IP networks. Specific properties of this subnetwork technology 
include link-layer support for unicast and multicast, large numbers of 
down-stream receivers, and efficiency of transmission.

These properties resemble those in some other wireless networks. The 
specific focus of the group is on the use of MPEG-2 transport 
(examples include the Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) standards: DVB-RCS;
DVB-S and DVB-T and related ATSC Specifications) in next generation
networks and is not concerned with the development, replacement, or
retention of existing protocols on the existing generation of networks.

The WG will endeavour to reuse existing open standard technologies, 
giving guidance on usage in IP networks, whenever they are able to 
fulfill requirements. For instance, we acknowledge the existing 
Multiprotocol Encapsulation (MPE) [ATSC A/90;ETSI EN 301192] and that 
this will continue to be deployed in the future to develop new 
markets. Any alternative encapsulation would need to co-exist with MPE.

Appropriate standards will be defined to support transmission of IPv4 
and IPv6 datagrams between IP networks connected using MPEG-2 
transport subnetworks. This includes options for encapsulation, dynamic
unicast address resolution for IPv4/IPv6, and the mechanisms needed to
map routed IP multicast traffic to the MPEG-2 transport subnetwork. 
The 
standards will be appropriate to both MPE and any alternative 
encapsulation method developed. The developed protocols may also be 
applicable to other multicast enabled subnetwork technologies 
supporting large numbers of directly connected systems.

The current list of work items is:

Specify the requirements and architecture for supporting IPv4/IPv6 via 
MPEG-2 transmission networks. Such requirements should consider the 
range of platforms currently (or anticipated to be) in use. This draft 
will be an Informational RFC.

Define a standards-track RFC defining an efficient encapsulation 
method. The design will consider the need for MAC addresses, the
potential need for synchronisation between streams, support for a wide
range of IPv4/IPv6 and multicast traffic.

Provide an Informational RFC describing a framework for unicast and 
multicast address resolution over MPEG-2 transmission networks. The 
document will describe options for the address resolution process, 
relating these to appropriate usage scenarios and suggesting 
appropriate protocol mechanisms for both the existing Multi-Protocol
Encapsulation (MPE) and the efficient encapsulation (2). Consideration
will be paid to existing standards, and the cases for IPv6 and IPv4 
will be described. 
 
Define standards-track RFC(s) to specify procedures for dynamic 
address resolution for IPv4/IPv6. This will describe the protocol and
syntax of the information exchanged to bind unicast and multicast flows
to the MPEG-2 TS Logical Channels.  This will include specific
optimisations appropriate for networks reaching large numbers of
down-stream systems.

 Goals and Milestones:

   Done         Draft of a WG Architecture ID describing usage of MPEG-2 
                transport for IP transmission. 

   Done         Draft of a WG ID on the new Encapsulation. 

   Done         Submit Architecture to IESG 

   Done         Draft of a WG ID on the AR Framework, specifying mechanisms to 
                perform address resolution. 

   Done         Submit Encapsulation to IESG 

   Done         Draft of a WG ID defining Security Requirements for the ULE 
                protocol 

   Done         Submit AR Framework to IESG 

   Apr 2006       Draft of a WG ID defining an IP Address Resolution (AR) 
                protocol 

   Aug 2006       Submit ULE Security Requirements to IESG 

   Dec 2006       Progress the Encapsulation RFC along the IETF standards track 

   Jan 2007       Submit AR Protocol to IESG 

   Aug 2007       Submit Extension Header Formats to IESG for publication as PS 


 Internet-Drafts:

Posted Revised         I-D Title   <Filename>
------ ------- --------------------------------------------
Jun 2005 Aug 2006   <draft-ietf-ipdvb-ar-05.txt>
                Address Resolution Mechanisms for IP Datagrams over MPEG-2 
                Networks 

Dec 2006 Dec 2006   <draft-ietf-ipdvb-sec-req-00.txt>
                Security requirements for the Unidirectional Lightweight 
                Encapsulation (ULE) protocol 

Jan 2007 Jan 2007   <draft-ietf-ipdvb-ule-ext-00.txt>
                Extension Formats for Unidirectional Link Encapsulation (ULE) 
                and the Generic Stream Encapsulation (GSE) 

 Request For Comments:

  RFC   Stat Published     Title
------- -- ----------- ------------------------------------
RFC4259 I    Dec 2005    A Framework for transmission of IP datagrams over MPEG-2 
                       Networks 

RFC4326Standard  Dec 2005    Unidirectional Lightweight Encapsulation (ULE) for 
                       transmission of IP datagrams over an MPEG-2 Transport 
                       Stream