MediaSync pp 547-564 | Cite as

Video Delivery and Challenges: TV, Broadcast and Over The Top

  • Tim Stevens
  • Stephen Appleby


The TV production and broadcasting industry predates the ubiquitous computing and IP technologies of today. However, just as these advances have revolutionised other industries, they are also causing production and broadcasting to change. Here, we outline the opportunities that general computing and IP delivery offer this industry, and discuss how the precise synchronisation required by TV services could be implemented using these more generic technologies, and how this in turn could lead to newer ways of delivering TV-like services. We first discuss how today’s TV industry has been shaped by its analogue roots, and that the terminology and working practices still in some ways reflect the analogue world. We briefly cover TV history from the 1950s and the evolution of Public-Sector Broadcasting in the UK, before considering how newer services such as digital TV, satellite and video streaming have enabled services, but also throw up new issues around delay and synchronisation. We propose that some of these issues could be mitigated by moving to an IP delivery model, with media elements composed at the client device, and not globally time-locked to precise, system-wide clocks. Finally, we discuss some of the IP delivery technologies such as multicast, adaptive streaming and the newer protocols that are replacing traditional HTTP.


Broadcast TV Asynchronous infrastructure Future IP transport protocols 


  1. 1.
    SMPTE.: Transport of high bit rate media signals over IP networks. ST 2022–6:2012 (2012).
  2. 2.
    E.g. Raboy, M.: Public broadcasting for the 21st century, p. 610. Indiana University Press (1995). ISBN 1-86020-006-0Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kooij, W., Stokking, H., van Brandenburg, R., de Boer, P-T.: Playout delay of TV signals: measurement system design, validation and results, ACM TVX 2014, Newcastle, UK (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boronat, F., Mekuria, R., Montagud, M., Cesar, P.: Distributed media synchronization for shared video watching: issues, challenges, and examples. In: Ramzan, N., van Zwol, R., Lee, J.-S., Clver, K., Hua, X.-S. (eds) Social Media Retrieval, Springer Computer Communications and Networks Series, pp. 393–431. Springer, London, UK (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holbrook, H.: Using internet group management protocol version 3 (IGMPv3) and multicast listener discovery protocol version 2 (MLDv2) for source-specific multicast (2006).
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Schulzrinne, H., et al.: RTP: a transport protocol for real-time applications. Internet Standard (2003).
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC.: Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information: systems. International Standard 5th Edition ISO/IEC 13818 1 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sarginson, P.: MPEG-2: overview of the systems layer. BBC R&D Report (1996).
  10. 10.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering (Interactive Technologies), chapter 5 (1994). ISBN-13: 978-0125184069Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ITU-T.: One-way transmission time. Transmission systems and media, digital systems and networks, Series G (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    IEEE standard for a precision clock synchronization protocol for networked measurement and control systems (2008).
  13. 13.
    Belshe, M.: Hypertext transfer protocol version 2 (HTTP/2) RFC 7540 (2015). ISSN: 2070-1721Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W3Techs—World Wide Web technology surveys. data Copyright (C) 2009–2017 Q-Success DI Gelbmann GmbH. Accessed May 2017
  15. 15.
    Bishop, M.: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) over QUIC. IETF draft (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.British Telecommunications PLCLondonUK

Personalised recommendations