coverstory_cover story 26/11/2014 18:57 Page 2
distribution, particularly on unmanaged
networks can present quality risk, making
T&M a more important feature. Just as we
are transitioning to networks where
consumers aren’t aware how the content
arrives - whether DVB or IP,
monitoring solutions should also
offer a unified view.
JDSU: 'IP' can mean a few
different things. It could mean
delivery of DVB multicasts over an
IP network, either for distribution
(i.e., within headend or core
network) or delivery to subscriber,
as in an IPTV implementation. It
could also mean streaming video
to IP devices in a TV Anywhere,
three screens, or OTT
environment. In both cases, the
new T&M challenges revolve
around correlating traditional DVB
QoE problems to root causes from
IP distribution, or new video
processes that convert DVB MPEG
streams to ABR content that can
be presented on IP devices. You
also have additional considerations
for the ABR video streaming
environment.
Mariner: The technology
transition creates new
opportunities for SPs (Service
Providers), but comes at the price
of increased complexity. As a
result, ensuring QOE is more and
more an exercise in managing
complexity, and increases the
demand for effective monitoring. Hybrid
solutions are a reality, and Mariner believes
that coherent, integrated monitoring and
analytics solutions will span the DVB and IP
environments. Consumers do not
compartmentalise services along technology
boundaries, so operational systems must also
be seamless across hybrid environments to
provide consistency of operational support.
Rohde & Schwarz: The ongoing
fragmentation of video distribution networks
increases the complexity of monitoring. Most
new video formats or distribution protocols
bring along new
monitoring
equipment, while
the old equipment
remains to support the legacy signals. This
often results in very complex monitoring
installations with a mix of systems from
different vendors. As it is hard to keep the
complete operational team trained on each
system, a hybrid and unified monitoring
solution supporting everything from video
baseband to OTT, from SD to UHD
resolutions, is definitely desirable.
S3 Group: The majority of operators now
offer some level of on-demand services
delivered over IP. These services complement
their traditional broadcast delivered services
and as a result require these operators to
maintain a hybrid network for the next
number of years. This gives rise to a potential
variation in QoE that consumers experience
when consuming services coming over
delivery networks with different QoS
characteristics. There is a clear desire to
present a unified experience to the consumer
making it as seamless as possible to find and
consume content no matter what the delivery
network. This reinforces the expectation from
the consumer that all content will arrive with
the same start-up latency and playback
quality.
Tektronix: The challenges of monitoring
by the in-plant encoders), in the core
network (for QoS issues such as dropped
packets) and post QAM RF (for RF
performance as well as TS QoS issues).
In an ABR IP distribution
network, the monitoring challenge
at ingest is identical, but it is also
vital to monitor the output of the
transcoders for all profiles of all
channels. Our Sentry platform can
be used for monitoring both DVB
content as well as the transcoder
outputs for ABR content. The next
challenge is to validate that the
delivery platform (origin or caching
server) is capable of delivering the
content to the consumer. This is
achieved by subscribing to the
content and validating the manifest
files, checking that the bitrates are
correct and that each of the profiles
is delivered with an acceptable load
time. The implementation of a
monitoring strategy is in some
ways similar and in other ways very
different for the two delivery
platforms and as a result a hybrid
monitoring strategy is a necessity.
Torque Video Systems: Moving
from DVB to IP is perhaps a little
too generic. The real question is
moving from terrestrial RF
networks (e.g., DVB-T/T2) to
managed IP networks (e.g., IPTV)
to unmanaged IP delivery (OTT).
The distributed nature of IPTV
makes monitoring anywhere but the headend
an expensive affair. Monitoring for OTT is
especially troublesome because no one is in
charge. Between the point of origin, the CDN,
the ISP, and the end device there are
multiple operators, perhaps spanning
multiple countries. The 'right way' for
optimising OTT QoE is still evolving, but
we're not there yet.
VeEX: That depends on who is doing the
transition. If the transition is done by OTT
services taking market shares from DVB
providers and the pipe used to provide these
'IP' can mean a few different things: delivery of DVB multicasts over
an IP network, delivery to subscriber or streaming video
QoE for a DVB-based linear distribution
platform are somewhat different to
monitoring an IP delivery platform. Using
cable as an example, it is normal to monitor
at ing