[Ground-station] ATSC open source implementations

[Ron Economos]

The owner of libatsc3 has informed me that the repository has been set 
to private for some maintenance. Should be back in a few weeks.

Ron W6RZ

On 8/21/23 16:59, Ron Economos via Ground-Station wrote:
>
> Here's the link for libatsc3. But the main repo 
> https://github.com/jjustman/libatsc3 is 404 right now.
>
> https://www.ngbp.org/p/atsc-30-ngbp-open-source-tools.html
>
> Ron
>
> On 8/21/23 16:06, Michelle Thompson wrote:
>> Thank you Ron!
>>
>> You were going to be one of the first persons I brought up, and now I 
>> have a much more complete list of your work.
>>
>> -Michelle Thompson
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 6:56 PM Ron Economos via Ground-Station 
>> <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:
>>
>>     I hope you haven't forgotten about my ATSC 3.0 transmitter open
>>     source implementation.
>>
>>     https://github.com/drmpeg/gr-atsc3
>>
>>     It's an almost complete implementation of the PHY layer and can
>>     be used to transmit Transport Streams. It does not implement the
>>     ROUTE/DASH higher layers.
>>
>>     Here's a demo clip where I back off the power to find the minimum
>>     required SNR (2 to 3 dB for 9/15 QPSK).
>>
>>     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmIGM0I3NE0
>>
>>     There was an open source receiver repository (libatsc3) for the
>>     upper layers, but it's been deleted. I just e-mailed the author
>>     to find out what's going on.
>>
>>     Despite getting some press for my transmitter in TV Technology
>>     and IEEE Broadcast Technology Magazine, I've never received any
>>     feedback.
>>
>>     https://www.tvtechnology.com/opinion/learning-about-atsc-30on-the-web-or-on-the-bench
>>
>>     https://bts.ieee.org/images/files/newsletters/BTS-4thQtr2022-web_1.pdf
>>
>>     The ATSC 3.0 roll out is in a bit of turmoil right now due to
>>     broadcasters applying encryption/DRM to their channels. The most
>>     popular STB style receivers are not capable of decryption and
>>     consumers are being disenfranchised. A couple thousand complaints
>>     have been filed with the FCC.
>>
>>     https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/results?q=(proceedings.name:(%2216-142*%22))
>>
>>     Hopefully, that link works. If it doesn't, use the link below and
>>     search for the 16-142 proceeding.
>>
>>     https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings
>>
>>     There's also been videos on some YouTube channels.
>>
>>     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NhV5BdEWqo
>>
>>     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxnW3ed9yR4
>>
>>     Since there's no reduced bandwidth option for ATSC 3.0, it's not
>>     very ham friendly. Folks are reluctant to fire up full 6 MHz wide
>>     signals, especially on 70 cm.
>>
>>     Ron W6RZ
>>
>>     On 8/20/23 10:44, Michelle Thompson via Ground-Station wrote:
>>>     I have a meeting in the works to talk to ATSC committee
>>>     leadership about open source implementations.
>>>
>>>     There's a clear difference between DVB and ATSC in ease of use
>>>     for open source work. ATSC folks are interested in hearing more
>>>     about how things can improve.
>>>
>>>     If you can help with this effort, please get in touch so we can
>>>     put our best effort forward in communicating with ATSC.
>>>
>>>     If you know of someone that would be a positive addition to the
>>>     discussion, please forward this and let me know how to get in
>>>     touch with them.
>>>
>>>     -Michelle Thompson
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20230822/55a04c83/attachment.htm>