[iptv-users] STB/video stream monitoring

[Kevin Shymkiw]

That seems to be the model we want to move to is a "super head end".  It 
seems to make more sense in terms of managing and verifying content quality.

I hear alot of you talking about DSLAM issues, etc... are most of you 
doing IPTV through DSL or VDSL Networks?

Kevin

Frank Bulk wrote:
>
> Since we use a state-wide shared head end , if there's an issue with 
> an encoder other service providers in the state see it, too.  
> Additionally the organization that manages the headend has Ineoquest, 
> too.  Today we pick up the MPEG-2 video over OC-3s, so we have all the 
> ATM PM counters, too, in regards to transport.
>
>  
>
> Frank
>
>  
>
> *From:* Kevin Shymkiw [mailto:kshymkiw at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 01, 2009 7:24 AM
> *To:* frnkblk at iname.com
> *Cc:* 'Alex Moen'; iptv-users at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [iptv-users] STB/video stream monitoring
>
>  
>
> In all honesty, we have had alot of Finger Pointing that ended up 
> being bad feeds from the source, especially since we pick up alot of 
> our feeds from other Video/Cable Providers.  But without a doubt, if 
> you have a video probe at your edge before you go to the Copper Plant, 
> it makes it very easy to point the finger at them and have the proof 
> to support it.
>
> We do also seem to have alot of issues, when we are doing >6-8G of 
> Multicast over some of the Cisco Cards we have deployed, so at times, 
> that does come back to bite us.
>
> Kevin
>
> Frank Bulk wrote:
>
> When you have this finger-pointing, what does the problem actually end up
> being?  The vast majority of our video quality issues relate to the copper
> plant.  Only a minority have been related our transport gear's ability to
> drop the content off the DSL port.
>  
> Frank
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Moen [mailto:alexm at ndtel.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 11:35 AM
> To: frnkblk at iname.com <mailto:frnkblk at iname.com>
> Cc: iptv-users at puck.nether.net <mailto:iptv-users at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [iptv-users] STB/video stream monitoring
>  
> Take a look at Ineoquest's iVMS (for transport quality monitoring) and  
> iCMS (for video/audio content quality and end-user experience  
> monitoring).  We use both of these products, and they can be both a  
> lifesaver and a "finger-pointing" resolver.
>  
> http://www.ineoquest.com
>  
> Alex
>  
>  
> On Jun 30, 2009, at 11:02 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
>  
>   
>
>     Is anyone doing any video stream error monitoring/checking from the
>
>     point-of-view of the STB?  I know that there is at least one vendor  
>
>     out
>
>     there, Psytechnics, that has a module it can integrate into the  
>
>     middleware
>
>     of the STB, but I haven't see IPTV middleware vendors picking that  
>
>     up.  I
>
>     know that the Amino 110 writes out some rudimentary stats to the  
>
>     drive.
>
>      
>
>     We track most of our video problems based on the 15-minute PM bins  
>
>     that our
>
>     transport gear's ADSL ports record, but nothing L4 and up.
>
>      
>
>     Ideally every STB would have something Psytechnic-like built in.
>
>      
>
>     Frank
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     iptv-users mailing list
>
>     iptv-users at puck.nether.net <mailto:iptv-users at puck.nether.net>
>
>     https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/iptv-users
>
>         
>
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> iptv-users mailing list
> iptv-users at puck.nether.net <mailto:iptv-users at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/iptv-users
>  
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/iptv-users/attachments/20090702/bf2264fa/attachment-0001.html>