I don't think there 
  is any confusion here.  All streams of data ranging from kilobits per 
  second for low quality audio to 3 gigabits per second for 1080p/60 are 
  potentially valid for transmission over a consumer network.  It all 
  depends on the functionality of the display device.  If it is a dumb 
  video display you may need to send it uncompressed video.  If it has any 
  one of a number of possible decoders then you can send the video compressed in 
  those formats at lower data rates.  All I was pointing out is that there 
  are many other potential data rates for video between the 25Mbs DV and HDV 
  formats and 1.5Gb/s (or higher) of uncompressed HD video.
   
  Fred
   
  -----Original 
  Message-----
From: Geoff 
  Thompson [mailto:gthompso@nortel.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 2:38 
  PM
To: Tuck, Fred
Cc: 
  STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RE] Video 
  question
   
  Lest we confuse...
There is a 
  significant difference between the requirements for transmitting live 
  video  from a camera in DV vs. transferring recorded video from a 
  camera.
It is only the live case that is within the scope of problems 
  that is driving the formation of a new project.
Geoff
At 10:26 
  AM 7/1/2005 , Tuck, Fred wrote:
  Also I would expect 
  as the HDV or other HD formats evolve that 50 or 100 mbs variants will 
  emerge.  If you want to do high quality frame accurate editing of your 
  video you don't really want to capture it in an MPEG format with P and B 
  frames. You want the original in an all I frame format like DV.  That 
  takes a lot more bandwidth.
 
Fred 
  Tuck
-----Original 
  Message-----
From: 
  owner-stds-802-3-re@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-re@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Battaglia
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 12:37 
  PM
To: 
  STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RE] Video 
  question
 
Mike,
I was also add 
  conventional (digital) consumer camcoders to your list.  It is my 
  understanding that most of these still use DV, which is no where near as 
  compressed as MPEG-2.  I realize that many camcorder manufacturers are 
  moving to MPEG compressed format, but there are still a a lot of DV cameras 
  out there.
It's not inconceivable that you may want to move this 
  content on a home network without further 
  compression.
Jim
Michael Johas Teener wrote:
Not speaking for Kevin, but
based on earlier conversations with CE vendors,
  MSOs, and content providers, uncompressed 
  video is useful for:   1) Games (from console to display) ... currently 
  only SD quality (that's about 270 Mbit/sec in the US, as you noted) ... GigE 
  can carry ... but the next generation consoles support HD at 1080i or roughly 
  1.5Gbit/sec ...   2) Overlaying the UI from a STB or other residential 
  gateway ... currently requires uncompressed video because low cost STBs do not 
  include MPEG2 *encoders* ...   3) Security/monitoring cameras ... 
  although the fidelity requirements are rather low, so cheap compressors are 
  becoming available that meet this need ...     On 6/30/05 9:36 PM, 
  "Geoffrey M. Garner" <gmgarner@comcast.net> wrote: 
      
  In the discussions so far, the digital 
  video has been assumed to either enter the residence from a service provider 
  or originate in the residence at a DVD player.  It seems that both cases, 
  at least at present, use compressed digital video.  Are there 
  applications that involve uncompressed digital video (or are there expected to 
  be such applications)?     
      -- Jim Battaglia Digital 
  Entertainment Networking Pioneer Research Center USA, Inc. 101 Metro Drive, 
  Suite 264 San Jose, CA 95110-1343 408-437-1800x203 408-437-1717 (fax)