Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by harsh, May 18, 2011.
Yes, this is the key. I think this is where a lot of people get confused on exactly what AllVid is.
With RVU only, you could not implement a DirecTV Moxi box, for example. The DirecTV RVU server generates ALL of the STB UI and functionality.
AllVid, on the other hand, provides a basic interface to the provider's service. You get a video stream, basically, and then your AllVid compliant STB then generates the interface and features and handles the recording and scheduling. (Yes, I'm aware that AllVid does create SOME of the UI elements, particularly for VOD and PPV, but that is not the same as RVU)
AllVid is the interface between your STB and the provider (IE: the tuner). RVU is an interface between the STB and your display. I can certainly see a combined AllVid/RVU box: A single Tivo model that you buy at Best Buy regardless of what kind of TV service(s) you have that will allow you to have one Tivo on multiple TVs. The AllVid side connects you to DirecTV/DISH/cable/fiber and the RVU side gets you from the Tivo 'server' out to your TVs. With RVU only, you couldn't have the Tivo doing the scheduling, recording, etc. There's no need for them to compete (other than the providers don't really want to do AllVid in the first place, but CE companies should get on both bandwagons)
Right now Allvid got nuttin'. That's the concern.
RVU can add the basic interface. In fact they have to or the FCC won't pick it. Really is that simple.
also, everything that I have seen up until this point suggests that RVU wouldn't approve a device that records. Plus, it'd need to be more than a dumb interface between the RVU client and server. If a Tivo were serving as the RVU client, it'd need to be able to get specific information from the RVU server in terms of current channel number, tuner status, available channels, etc.
I don't know that recording would be disallowed so much as making sure the DRM chain is maintained.
Ok, so how smart or dumb do you want this interface?
The requirements set by the FCC will have to be met or RVU won't get picked. RVU will have to allow generic DVRs that meet the copy protection requirements--AllVid's copy protection requirements. (Which should be very similar or the same as RVUs.)
I am not saying RVU is ready to drop in. (It might be, but I don't have a copy of the spec to know.) I am saying the RVU is closer to the Allvid requirements than Allvid is today.
All I know is that I think this is very exciting.
Well, it should be as dumb as possible, just dumping out raw data. However for something like a Tivo to be able to use it, there will need to be more data available than RVU currently sends down the pipe.
And I agree with Doug that the concern for RVU probably is more DRM than competition from other DVRs, and given TiVo's support for DRM, I don't see that being a problem.
RVU is probably closer to Allvid than AllVid only because RVU is about to start shipping, which is perhaps the most important milestone, but doesn't mean RVU will ever be a replacement.
We're quickly getting off track, but I started reading some of the industry filings regarding AllVid. DirecTV is clearly uninterested in AllVid at all. I think the release of the PR about the HR34 betas has little to do with DISH's MRV solution and more to do with AllVid. See: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021649290
DirecTV wants "pixel accurate UI" from the 'gateway' which totally defeats the purpose if you want to replace your DirecTV DVR with a Tivo or Moxi.
DISH's filing doesn't say they're against AllVid, only that they want to be free to continue to release their own STBs in addition to AllVid.
RVU could be, that is my point. If RVU has or adds the basic information necessary for a generic DVR and TV to understand the channels and order them.
RVU is built upon DLNA, as will AllVid. DLNA should provide enough framework for the machine to machine interface to be defined. After all, that is was it was meant for.
In that IPv4 can coexist with IPv6, it will be. If you're expecting that it will support IPv6 natively, I'm willing to bet that you'll be disappointed. These devices aren't intended for the Internet proper.
There's also the limitations of the various existing DECA adapters to consider.
In the end, some of the efficiency tricks of IPv6 are probably already built into DECA so the benefits wouldn't be as big as they are between IPv4 and IPv6 on conventional Ethernet networks.
RVU is the mechanism that presents a user interface along with a video stream from a server, not an STB.
What is the point of having an flexible UI if all it is going to be used for is 1080p televisions?
When IPv6 hits, there will be less need for NAT and therefore NAT routers. At some point RVU will need to support IPv6. I'd be willing to bet money that the spec includes using IPv6.
The STB creates the UI, whether that set top is in a closet or at the TV. RVU is the mechanism that sends the UI from the box to the TV.
What's the point of having a Tivo if I have to use DirecTV's interface? (and therefore their features) The point of AllVid is that you get a raw data stream from the service provider and you get to buy whatever kind of DVR, TV, or other device you want. The point of RVU is that you can use one box to centralize your tuners/storage and blast that out to many displays. There may be changes in the future, but as it stands RVU is not designed to allow you to bring your own CE devices other than TVs/projectors.
Sorry but don't agree with less need for NAT. I don't see your ISP giving out as many addresses as you want, they will still want to assign you just one public address.
You're already wrong. In Comcast's public trials, they give you an entire prefix. I don't know how many IPs that gives you, but it's a lot.
IPv6 has approximately 61,977,889,628,116,596,793,421 IPv6 addresses per square foot of the earth's surface. That means that you can literally have as many IP addresses as you want. I'm sure that some people will still use NAT, since it works as a firewall, but there are lots of applications that will work better when they are not behind a NAT.
Each user has been delegated an IPv6 /64 block as part of the trial which is comprised of approximately 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 (18 quintillion)
Not true. The normal IPv6 assignment from an ISP, Tunnel broker, etc is a /64. A /64 of IPv6 is 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 IPs. I have 2 /64's myself.
Key word there. Speculation. The payscale information for HR34 doesn't exist yet. There isn't a person in any HSP payroll dept that's even heard of the HR34.
Why hasn't he speculated about that here? He's obviously a member if he's up to date on the HR34 RVU stuff [It has never been mentioned in ANY training yet].
I'm just saying, you're making it up. That's all
Sorry, didn't know that ISP's were going to be that free with addressing for customers homes.
Well with 340 "untillion" IPv6 addresses they can afford to be giving. :lol:
That would be cool if the HR34 was the size of the H25.