I'm not sure why carriage of the primary and multicast streams of a station
should be any different, for MVPDs, whether the station is using ATSC 1.0 or
3.0. In fact, if a station is simulcasting ATSC 1.0 and 3.0, what difference
does that make to MVPD carriage at all? Presumably, the simulcast applies to
the primary channel and all subchannels.
The pivotal issue here is whether the FCC should permit non-simulcast streams
be transmitted, in ATSC 1.0 and 3.0. Here is the quote:
"Under the proposed rules, broadcasters who launch 3.0 must continue
simulcasting in the current DTV standard format, ATSC 1.0."
Anything suggest this only applies to the .1 subchannel? Anything suggest that
if the ATSC 3.0 is transmitting UHD, that the MVPDs have to carry UHD? I don't
see that implication. I don't even see anything to suggest that HD service must
be retained, for the ATSC 1.0 simulcasts.
Bert
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.tvtechnology.com/resources/0006/fcc-proposes-nextgen-tv-deployment/280344
FCC Proposes Next-Gen TV Deployment
New chairman Pai hopes for approval 'later this year'
February 17, 2017
By Deborah D. McAdams
WASHINGTON-A plan for voluntary adoption of the "next-generation" television
broadcasting transmission standard known as ATSC 3.0 has been proposed at the
Federal Communications Commission, marking a seminal event in the development
of the standard.
"We propose to authorize television broadcasters to use the 'Next-Generation'
broadcast television transmission standard associated with recent work of the
Advanced Television Systems Committee on a voluntary, market-driven basis,
while they continue to deliver current-generation digital television broadcast
service, using the ATSC 1.0 standard to their viewers," the 49-page Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking stated.
Comments are due on the NPRM 60 days after publication in the Federal Register;
replies, 90 days after publication.
The National Association of Broadcasters welcomed the news. "NAB strongly
supports the FCC moving ahead on two proceedings of significant importance to
broadcasters-a rulemaking on Next-Gen television and an AM revitalization
order," said Dennis Wharton, executive vice president of communications said.
"Both items will foster technological innovation, increase opportunities for
minority and female owners, and create new and unique services for consumers.
Chairman Pai deserves credit for departing from the past practice of both
Republican and Democratic-controlled commissions, and publicly releasing the
proposals early to inject greater transparency in the FCC rulemaking process.
We believe this action will provide greater clarity for stakeholders and
greater trust from the public in dealing with the FCC going forward."
ATSC President Mark Richer said "the development of ATSC 3.0 is a landmark in
broadcasting, with hundreds of the best technical minds in the industry working
on this next generation technology. The ATSC sees the commission's Notice as
another important step forward for Next-Gen TV. Core elements of the ATSC 3.0
standard already are approved and proven, which we hope will give the FCC and
broadcasters confidence for voluntary implementation of ATSC 3.0. We'll look
forward to seeing how various stakeholders respond to the commission's Notice,
and we're hopeful that the NPRM process will be completed in a timely manner."
In a blog about the deployment on www.broadcastingcable.com, newly installed
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wrote, "Broadcasting remains an indispensable part of
America's communications landscape."
VOLUNTARY ADOPTION
The NPRM, which sets forth a voluntary adoption framework for the standard, is
scheduled for a Feb. 23 vote-inside the 90-day NRPM comment-reply cycle-with
"the commission's ultimate resolution. subject to change," according to a
footnote on the document.
"I hope that we can issue a final approval of the standard later this year,"
Pai said.
A February vote would roughly coincide with the end of the TV spectrum
incentive auction, which starts the 39-month deadline clock for stations moving
to new channel assignments. The NPRM seeks feedback on how to incorporate ATSC
3.0 into this post-auction channel repack.
The NPRM also seeks comment on:
. Which component(s) of the ATSC 3.0 standard must be codified by the FCC to
enable voluntary adoption.
. Issues related to local ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 simulcasting.
. Cable and satellite carriage-no must-carry for 3.0, and voluntary carriage of
3.0 under retransmission consent.
. OET-69 to calculate interference potential and signal-protection threshold
(and what other services may be affected).
. Public interest obligations as "currently applicable to television
broadcasters."
. A tuner mandate being "unnecessary at this time."
. Authorization of 3.0 single frequency networks.
. Require ATSC 3.0 public service announcements, including how it will "not
negatively impact the post-incentive auction transition process."
COMPONENTS
ATSC 3.0 comprises suite of about 20 standards divided in the three
layers-physical, management and protocols, and applications and presentation.
This modular approach enables updates vs. overhauls and allows for flexibility
of use.
In their April 2016 petition requesting approval for voluntary deployment of
ATSC 3.0, broadcasters and consumer electronics makers limited their request to
the physical layer standard ATSC A/321, the "System Discovery and Signaling"
architecture, or "bootstrap," said to provide a "universal entry point into a
broadcast waveform," for multiple service types such fixed and mobile
television, for example.
South Korean TV manufacturer LG introduced the first ATSC 3.0 4KTVs this year
at CES, also asked that A/322, the "Physical Layer Protocol," also be included
because it defines the non-bootstrap portion of the physical layer.
SIMULCASTING
Deployment of ATSC 3.0 would be on a "voluntary, market-driven basis," and
without a tuner mandate, so broadcasters will have to continue transmitting a
legacy signal since there currently are no TVs in the U.S. market that decode
ATSC 3.0. Under the proposed rules, broadcasters who launch 3.0 must continue
simulcasting in the current DTV standard format, ATSC 1.0.
The NPRM presents a couple of simulcasting "host" scenarios, where a station
deploying ATSC 3.0 could arrange for a same-market station to carry either its
1.0 simulcast or the 3.0 feed. E.g., if just one station in a designated market
area lights up 3.0, it could have the cooperating station host its 1.0 signal,
or if two fire up 3.0, one could carry the next-gen transmissions and the
other, the legacy 1.0 signals.
The host scenarios reflect the previously discussed "lighthouse/nightlight"
approach by which one "lighthouse" station initially carries all the 3.0
signals in a market, and as more 3.0 receivers are deployed, ATSC 1.0
transmissions are finally carried by just one "nightlight" station. The
commission proposes that next-gen broadcasters transmit "at least one free ATSC
3.0 video stream. at all times throughout the ATSC coverage area," and that it
be "at least as robust as a comparable DTV signal."
Further, the commission asked whether or not simulcasts should be separately
licensed as second or temporary channels, or treated as multicast streams. A
licensing scheme would reflect the same procedures adopted for channel-sharing
arrangements, and it would allow noncommercial educational stations to host
commercial station signals. A multicast approach would "minimize administrative
burdens," but would "appear to preclude" NCE stations from hosting commercial
stations on account of current FCC rules.
The NPRM also asks about the interest level of smaller operations, including
lowpower TV licensees and rural broadcasters, for deploying 3.0, and whether
LPTVs should be able to serve as host stations and be given the option of
flash-cutting to 3.0.
Further, the NPRM asks if a simulcasting sunset date should be set for
cessation of ATSC 1.0 transmissions.
The NPRM notes that multichannel video provider carriage requirements would
depend somewhat whether 3.0 streams are licensed or defined as multicast
streams. Under a licensed approach, a broadcaster could choose between
must-carry or retrans consent for its 1.0 or its 3.0 transmission. Under a
multicasting approach, the lines are less clear. Only the host station's
primary 1.0 signal, for example, would be covered by mustcarry, while the
hosted signal would not be. The NPRM asks if the hosted signal should also be
considered primary.
With regard to 3.0, the commission said it's too early to mandate carriage
since it has not yet been settled how cable and satellite TV providers
technically would do so. It also asks if and how retransmission consent should
be applied to 3.0, and whether it should be prohibited until the "ATSC
Specialist Group on Conversion and Redistribution of ATSC 3.0 Service produces
its initial report" later this year.
INTERFERENCE & SFNS
Petitioners asked that OET-69, the interference parameters used for current
ATSC 1.0 digital TV transmissions, be used for 3.0. The commission agreed.
OET-69 also would be the reference for service protection of 3.0 signals, and
of co-channel and adjacent channel signals. The 3.0 service area would reflect
the 1.0 service area: "We propose to define a 'DTV-equivalent' service area for
a station transmitting in ATSC 3.0 using the methodology and planning factors
defined for ATSC 1.0 in OET Bulletin No. 69," the NPRM states. "This means that
for a UHF next-gen TV station, the DTV-equivalent service area would be defined
at 41 dBμV/m plus a dipole adjustment factor."
The document proposes authorization of single frequency networks for ATSC 3.0
under the commission's existing rules for distributed transmission systems,
with one amendment requiring that "all transmitters under a single license
follow the same standard."
The NPRM proposes to apply all current public-interest rules to 3.0
transmission, including those governing foreign ownership, political
broadcasting, children's programming, equal employment opportunities, public
inspection files, main studio requirements, indecency, sponsorship
identification, contest rules, the CALM Act, the Emergency Alert System, closed
captioning and video description.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
