Re: [AVT] Carrying SMPTE TimeCode in RTP

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Thu, 02 March 2006 17:23 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FErWn-00018J-PF; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:23:49 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FErWm-000107-0Q for avt@ietf.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:23:48 -0500
Received: from mr1.dcs.gla.ac.uk ([130.209.249.184]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FErWl-0007dw-Nn for avt@ietf.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:23:47 -0500
Received: from mangole.dcs.gla.ac.uk ([130.209.247.112]:50203) by mr1.dcs.gla.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.42) id 1FErWl-0000y3-AF; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 17:23:47 +0000
In-Reply-To: <p06230922c02bee60237b@[17.202.35.52]>
References: <E1F7LY1-0001Xu-UP@newodin.ietf.org> <p06230944c02267cd005a@[17.202.35.52]> <p06230922c02bee60237b@[17.202.35.52]>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <833A5198-77F0-4477-8C23-B442DAEB3FBE@csperkins.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Subject: Re: [AVT] Carrying SMPTE TimeCode in RTP
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 17:23:47 +0000
To: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2
Cc: avt@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: avt-bounces@ietf.org

On 2 Mar 2006, at 00:42, Dave Singer wrote:
> Answering my own email here, I'm assuming that the answer is yes to  
> the 2nd question.
>
> The extra bits in an 8-byte SMPTE time-code can be used to
> a) maintain the polarity of the code (numbers of 1s and 0s)
> b) indicate the relationship of the codes to color fields
> c) indicate whether it's drop-frame coding
> d) and then do one of
>    i) carry 4 characters more
>    ii) carry a date and time-zone indication (SMPTE 309M)
>    iii) carry some general SMPTE 262M data (control codes, text,  
> production info etc.)
>
> I don't believe we need color and polarity handling in RTP.
> We have drop-frame in the signalling.
>
> If we want to carry something as slowly-changing as a date or as  
> unchanging as a time-zone, I on't believe that embedding it here is  
> right.  Certainly thought should be applied before blindly applying  
> it.  If a date is needed, it's not needed inline;  at most it would  
> be in RTCP, and then I would argue for a new RTCP packet type to  
> carry it.
>
> The other two possibilities are 'general meta-data' and should not  
> be sub-embedded in a time-code, in RTP, but elevated and properly  
> labelled at the stream level.
>
> So, my answer is no, we do not need the full 8-byte SMPTE time-code.

Seems reasonable.

Colin

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt