[opendtv] Re: Broadcast Flag
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:15:06 -0700
Let's parse it.
1. If you don't do the upgrade, "you will not be able to receive protected
content". No problem there. But, that's well into the future, since there
is little to no interest RIGHT NOW among broadcasters to employ the
broadcast flag.
2. "and may interfere with unprotected content" as well. This appears wide
of the mark, but notice the "may." I'd say "maybe" but unlikely.
There are at least three Samsung consultants on this list that I've had
contact with. Maybe they'll clue me in on the reality behind this. Makes
me wonder what else they're updating at the same time.
Notice the "if the broadcast flag is broadcast." I haven't paid much
attention to the feature set of other PSIP generator manufacturers (to avoid
issues of copying, etc) in the past year or so, but I don't think that the
broadcast flag is used at all, due to it's legal newness, and the somewhat
thorny technical and marketing issues. Are the commercials flagged?
Heck, how do the non-satellite STBs upgrade?
While ATSC specs provide that receivers are not to process packets they do
not understand, I need to point out that the broadcast flag is implemented
as a descriptor in one or more PSIP tables. Maybe Samsung is saying
something they've discovered about the ability of their STBs and tuners to
deal with real-world implementations of the flag.
I can say that the Samsung consultants that I have encountered are very
savvy with the practical realities of their equipment, and they have -- in
at least two cases that I am familiar with -- expended much time and effort
to get to the bottom of reception issues involving just one station. In one
of those cases, despite one consultant having said that the station was at
fault, after recording many hours of transport streams and bringing them
back to Korea for analysis, the "reception" issue turned out to be a
too-narrow interpretation by Samsung of ATSC specs and recommended
practices.
Indeed, since this particular problem was only resolved in March, 2004, I
suspect that it might be behind this STB upgrade. The Chief Engineer who
told me of this situation was wondering how they would deal with it, and
this seems like a less than transparent way to deal with it.
Oh, let me mention the latter problem that I am speaking of. In a footnote
to A/54, users are advised that it is legal for transport encoders to send
out duplicate packets, as long as the continuity_counter for the duplicate
packets does not change. In normal practice, every time packets with the
same packet id are transmitted, the continuity counter is incremented by
one, so that receivers can insure that they have received every packet.
When the maximum is reached, the next continuity_counter reverts to zero to
begin the climb again.
Sometimes, Motorola encoders (in particular) send out duplicate packets but
they're fully duplicate, with the same continuity_counter bit pattern.
Properly implemented receivers will just discard the duplicate (assuming the
receiver got the first instance). IIRC, Moto is expected to release a patch
in August to minimize or eliminate the issue.
Can't wait until they do the announcements for "PSIP-E" and "E-VSB"
enhancements.
Call is another "early implementation" issue.
As for other manufacturers, I have not heard of this fuzzy issue causing
problems with any other receivers. These and other such early
implementation issues can be "easily" discovered. ONE of the U.S. TV
networks buys one of each make and model of DTV STB and receiver on the
market, and hooks them up to their test plant. BEFORE they roll out any new
equipment or systems, the changes are tested against every receiver to
discover the problems, if any. ONLY one network does this, and the same
network is rolling out improvements (currently to it's owned stations;
shortly to the rest of the affiliates) to solve problems and establish
functionality that other networks haven't begun to address.
It's another mantra for me: there will be laggards, and there will be
leaders.
I could go on, but I probably shouldn't. I find out that the more I know
about DTV, the less I am free to talk about.
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John Golitsis
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 1:39 PM
To: OpenDTV
Subject: [opendtv] Broadcast Flag
Samsung has issued the following notice to it's ATSC receiver customers:
http://www.samsungusa.com/stb_upgrade/
I note the following paragraphs:
"Failure to upgrade your receiver with the broadcast flag standard may
prevent
you from fully experiencing DTV since you will not be able too receive
protected
content and may interfere with unprotected content as well."
"If you fail to upgrade your set top box and the Broadcast Flag is broadcast
the
Samsung set top box could turn off and cycle on-off and nothing will be
displayed until the upgrade is performed. If you are a DirectTV customer the
upgrade will be handled automatically by DirectTV through your Satellite
connection."
Why is that? I always thought the BF would have no effect on existing
hardware?
What about all the other set-tops that aren't represented by major
manufacuters
(OEM'd product)? What about integrated sets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
