ttf13001 tpeg testfest handbook - tisa.org€¦ · 02b 06 -mar-13 additions and restructuring of...

TTF13001 - TPEG Testfest Handbook version 0.7.docx P a g e | 1

2ND TPEG Testfest

9-11 December 2013

IRT, Munich

TTF13001 – TPEG Testfest Handbook

Draft Version 0.7

05 September 2013


Document Control Sheet

Document Title: TPEG Testfest Handbook

Document reference: TTF13001 – TPEG Testfest Handbook

Issues:

Status: Draft

Editor: Stephanie Chaufton, TISA EO

Authors Affiliation

Teun Hendriks Teatownlake

François Fischer ERTICO

Martin Dreher Bmt

Igor Petrov IRT

Ronald Mies IRT

Andreas Gorsak Kenwood

Version history of this document

Version Date Comment

01 18-Feb-13 First version with agenda update

02 01-Mar-13 Test case reduction More explanation for test cases

02a 05-Mar-13 Comments from BR+MD

02b 06-Mar-13 Additions and restructuring of document by RM

03 09-Mar-13 Consolidation TH

04 12-Mar-13 Re-ordering of test cases

05 13-Mar-13 Adding accommodation details Editorial changes

06 30-July-13 Addition of TPEG over HTTP testing Change of Testfest date to 9-11 December 2013

07 05-Sept-13 Editorial changes, addition of option for USA or UK locations


Table of Contents

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5

2 Testfest description .............................................................................................................................. 6

3 TPEG Testfest test plan ......................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Overview of test categories .......................................................................................................... 7

3.2 “Common denominator” TPEG profile for TPEG clients ............................................................... 8

3.3 Requirements on TPEG clients ...................................................................................................... 9

3.4 Requirements on TPEG service providers ..................................................................................... 9

4 Details of recommended test cases .................................................................................................... 10

4.1 Basic TPEG connectivity test at installation and set-up .............................................................. 10

4.1.1 Service provider preparation .............................................................................................. 10

4.2 TPEG traffic (TEC, TFP) content tests .......................................................................................... 11


4.3 TPEG message management tests .............................................................................................. 15


4.4 User Interface and usability tests ............................................................................................... 18


4.5 TPEG service discovery tests (TPEG over DAB as bearer) ........................................................... 20


5 Agenda ................................................................................................................................................ 22

6 Scheduling (Pairing Plan) .................................................................................................................... 23

7 Discussion Forum ................................................................................................................................ 23

8 Travel, Accommodation ...................................................................................................................... 23

8.1 Venue .......................................................................................................................................... 23


8.2 Hotel booking .............................................................................................................................. 23

9 Registered Participants ....................................................................................................................... 24

10 Social event on Tuesday 10th December 2013, from 19:00 ................................................................ 25


1 Introduction The TPEG Testfest event is open to all TISA members, be it TPEG service providers, tool providers,

equipment manufacturers, or OEMs who are about to place their products on the market and who want

to be sure of the interoperability of their products.

This event is being hosted by IRT in Munich, Germany, on behalf of TISA and ERTICO.

The main scope of the event is to validate interoperability of the following TPEG applications (which

have successfully completed the TC review stage within ISO and are therefore in the process of being

published as official international standards):

TPEG-SNI, version 3.1/001 (TISA Specification SP11014, to become ISO/TS 18234-3)

TPEG-TEC, version 3.0/001 (TISA Specification SP11016, to become ISO/TS 18234-9)

TPEG-TFP, version 1.0/003 (TISA Specification SP12010, to become ISO/TS 21219-18)

TPEG DAB adaptation layer, version 1.0 (TISA specification SP10008)

TPEG HTTP adaptation layer, version 1.0 (TISA specification SP10022)

Interoperability tests will be designed in line with the complete TPEG framework and TPEG service

profiles (TAP profile and the emerging PSM profile).

Delivery methods will be chosen according to development stage of participant products. Also bearer

adaptation layers (DAB, HTTP, and optionally HD Radio) can be tested including test transmissions.

Note: this event will not certify any products nor will it publicize vendor specific results.


2 Testfest description Figure 1 illustrates the TPEG service delivery chain. The TPEG Testfest intends to test TPEG

interoperability at the service delivery level, i.e. the TPEG binary protocol transmitted via on-air / HTTP

interface and /or on the basis of binary file exchange.

Figure 1: the TPEG Testfest functional entities


Figure 2: the TPEG components

During the TPEG Testfest, test sessions will be executed between pairs of service providers and TPEG

clients as shown in figure 2.

3 TPEG Testfest test plan The test plan is arranged to cover selected use cases involving TPEG service providers and TPEG clients.

The test plan will take into account the development stage of the available equipment and

implementations registered for the event.

3.1 Overview of test categories Recommended test cases cover the following aspects:

TPEG content tests: Tests to assess client device capability to handle content correctly and to assess

its capability with TPEG traffic applications (TFP, TEC) in the delivery stream.

TPEG management tests: Tests to assess client device capability to comprehend message

management information correctly, using MMC metadata to manage message updates, replace

present information, even when obtained via an intermittent delivery channel.

User Interface and usability tests: Tests to assess client device capability in accurate UI presentation

and interpretation of delivered information for the benefit of the end-user. In this category , TISA


will prepare set of “safety-relevant” messages for testing a suggested set of messages in support

standardization for the ITS directive.

TPEG discovery tests: Tests to assess client device capability to decode SNI correctly and thus find,

select and switch between broadcast radio transmitter receptions (end-user or factory pre-set) and,

in the case of hybrid services, to switch to IP web requests, in the case where broadcast radio

reception fails or is not possible.

For each of these categories, detailed descriptions are given in section 4.

In addition to these test categories, a “basic” connectivity test will be created to ensure during set-up

that TPEG clients are able to receive a DAB broadcast, or connect to a TPEG HTTP server, and extract

relevant TPEG messages and display these in their HMI.

3.2 “Common denominator” TPEG profile for TPEG clients In the first TPEG Testfest in 2012, the common denominator of TPEG clients was able to handle the

following TPEG subset:

Uncompressed, unencrypted, TPEG transport frames, containing

- SNI with mandatory inclusion of both GST1 (Fast tuning) and GST7 (Versioning) ,

- TEC,

- TFP with section offsets in TMC extents,

- TMC location references,

- German locations drawn from the German TMC location table

In terms of delivery modes, the common denominator of TPEG clients was able to handle the following

delivery mode subset:

DAB transmission following the DAB adaptation layer

Note 1: Testfest facilities at IRT support ETI files, TPEG file and TPEG stream inputs (see document

TTF13003)

Note 2: At least one DAB Audio Service containing real audio is required to reach all clients.

Note 3: On DAB level, the MSC data groups shall have the CRC flag set to 0 (no datagroup CRC) in

accordance with the DAB adaptation layer (TISA specification SP10008)

TPEG binary file exchange (files containing binary TPEG transport frames)


3.3 Requirements on TPEG clients TPEG Testfest participants bringing TPEG client devices shall at least support the “common

denominator” TPEG profile described in section 3.2 handling as many delivery channels as possible, but

with as bare minimum a TPEG binary file interface.

In addition, this year also the connected service interface will be included as delivery channel following

the TPEG over HTTP adaptation layer. TPEG clients supporting TPEG over HTTP shall be able at the TPEG

Testfest to set/configure a specific TPEG server URL in the client for firing the IP requests to.

Of course, in addition, participants are welcome to bring clients with additional functionality. In

consultation with paired service providers, these can be evaluated (as well).

In particular, TPEG decoding of messages based on USA or UK locations may be of interest. TISA will

gauge interest and capability with TPEG service providers.

3.4 Requirements on TPEG service providers To achieve maximum interaction and pairing options with prospective TPEG clients service providers are

requested to create TPEG test data for the test cases corresponding to at least support the common

denominator TPEG profile described in section 3.2 with as many delivery channels as possible, but with

as bare minimum a TPEG binary file interface.

In addition, this year also the connected service interface will be included as delivery channel following

the TPEG over HTTP adaptation layer. TPEG service providers providing a HTTP service shall indicate

their needs for static of dynamic IP addresses well beforehand to the Testfest organizing team.

Service providers are requested to create TPEG TEC, TFP messages on German locations for purposes of

this Testfest. To support this:

TISA can supply on request a representative set of German TMC locations such that service

providers are able to “transcode” their normal TPEG messages on these German locations.

Of course, in addition, service providers attending the TPEG Testfest are welcome to bring additional

test data for their home market and their favorite location referencing techniques as well and/or more

precise TFP flow data with metric offsets. In consultation with paired clients, these test data can be

evaluated (as well).

In particular, TPEG services containing messages based on USA or UK locations may be useful. TISA will

gauge interest and capability with TPEG clients.


4 Details of recommended test cases This section provides a minimum list of recommended test cases for execution at the TPEG Testfest.

These tests are designed to cover a wide range of TPEG topics, as indicated in the previous section.

These test cases will be elaborated in a test plan for the Testfest.

Participating service providers are urged to support at least the test cases listed below. Further test

cases may be brought in as well, based on Testfest attendance and relevance.

4.1 Basic TPEG connectivity test at installation and set-up At the installation and set-up phase of the TPEG Testfest, the DAB transmission equipment at IRT will

transmit a basic test pattern, such that participating TPEG clients are able to check basic connectivity

and TPEG processing.

Service providers with a TPEG over HTTP service running shall also prepare a basic set of messages for

connectivity tests at installation and setup.

Test case Description Purpose

TPEG basic connectivity test

TPEG-0. Test:

Delivery of TPEG traffic frames fitting the “common denominator profile” via broadcast radio station 1 or TPEG over HTTP connection

Expected result:

Reception and display of TPEG service and traffic content in the TPEG client Test criteria to be checked:

It is possible to tune/connect to the service

Is the service name/label and/or service logo displayed

For DAB: Is the field strength/error rate limiting or full reception?

Did the client log warnings or error messages?

Was the SNI Versioning Information used in the TPEG client?

Could the reason for failed tuning be determined? e.g. missing signalization

If successful reception is achieved, are the German TEC and TFP messages decoded and properly shown in the UI of the TPEG client

Basic test of service reception and TPEG processing

4.1.1 Service provider preparation

Service providers should create a simple TPEG test data set with at least SNI and a few TEC messages

and TFP messages to allow basic connectivity tests during setup and installation. This applies both for

DAB transmission as for TPEG over HTTP servers


4.2 TPEG traffic (TEC, TFP) content tests Tests are planned for TPEG traffic service provider coding and decoding and display functionality in TPEG

clients. The following two test cases are meant to check interoperability for traffic messages.


TPEG traffic content tests

TPEG-1. Test

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, including various TEC messages (and optionally TFP messages), as transmitted in an average service coverage area.

Expected result:

Complete TEC content is shown to user, including TEC message texts/icons. Test criteria to be checked:

Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor or reference TPEG client

For at least 5 TEC messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic

editor - At least first (five) causes/subcauses in TEC message present in

the TPEG client - Cause text corresponding to translation - Is the correct length affected is displayed (when present) - other relevant quantifiers are displayed (e.g. number of lanes

closed) - if not all details are presented, was the choice of the subset still

giving the most important information? - How long did it take before new messages are shown in the device?

Validation of normal transmission pattern for TEC messages in particular

TPEG-2. Test

2. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, including various TFP messages (and optionally TEC messages), as transmitted in an average service coverage area.

Expected result:

Complete content is shown to user, including TEC message texts/icons. Test criteria to be checked:

Number of TFP messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor or reference TPEG client

For at least 5 TFP messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic

editor - Traffic flow states of subparts of locations corresponding to traffic

editor/service provider for current condition - Traffic flow states of subparts of locations corresponding to traffic

editor/service provider for predicted condition (if transmitted) - Are sections with metric offsets shown as expected (if transmitted)

Validation of normal transmission pattern for TFP messages in particular



TPEG traffic content tests

TPEG-3. Test

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, including various safety-relevant TEC messages, transmitted in a normal service coverage area.

Expected result:


Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor

For at least 5 TEC messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic

editor - At least first (five) causes/subcauses in TEC message present in

the TPEG client - Cause text corresponding to TISA translation

Interoperability validation for Safety-Relevant messages

Additional content related criteria to be evaluated:

Did a message trigger re-routing in the client?

Was the first decodable location referencing method used?

Did additional location referencing methods disturb the client?

Is the aggregation of TFP-Locations suitable for the client?


Service providers should create TPEG test data with at least SNI and TEC messages and TFP messages.

If using DAB as a delivery channel, at least two different stations/frequencies shall be supported as

follows:

Station 1: Frequency 1, Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): normal TEC and TFP messages.

Station 2: Frequency 2, Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): safety relevant TEC messages.

Note: for available frequencies within the Testfest facilities at IRT please refer to document TTF13003.

If using TPEG over HTTP as delivery channel, at least variants / server URLs shall be supported as follows:

TPEG Server URL1: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): normal TEC and TFP messages.

TPEG Server ULR2: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): safety relevant TEC messages.

Standard German coverage for messages ideally is Bavaria.


The set of safety relevant messages for test case TPEG-2 shall cover at least two or three TEC messages

for each of the following safety-relevant categories (following TISA position paper EO12004: TISA

Recommendation for the Minimum Set of Safety Related Messages) with some sample events noted:

Category Description

Ghost Driver The category “Ghost Driver” refers to any vehicle driving on the wrong side of the carriage way and thereby driving in the wrong direction (e.g. against the upcoming traffic).

vehicle on wrong carriageway

Dangerous road surface

The category “dangerous road surface” refers to any condition of the road surface which makes it exceptionally slippery: whether the low adherence is caused by an oil spillage, by black-ice or any other reason which one might not expect.

Slippery road

Flooding

(Ice/mud/fuel/loose chippings on road)

Snow drifts

Reduced visibility The category “reduced visibility” refers to any atmospheric condition (fog, heavy rain, heavy snow…) causing the sight range of drivers to fall below that required by safety at a normal driving speed.

Reduced visibility

Smoke hazard

Fog /dense fog

Animal / people / debris on the road

The category “Animal / people / debris on the road” covers all types of animals, debris and people which are standing on a road where one would not expect to find them and where their presence may require an emergency manoeuvre to avoid collision.

Objects/Fallen trees on road

Shed load

People/children/cyclists/animals on roadway

Rockfalls/avalanches/landslips

People throwing objects on roads

Unmanaged road blockage The category “unmanaged road blockage” refers to any blockage of a road, partial or total which has not been adequately secured and sign-posted

Road/bridge/tunnel/exit blocked

Unprotected accident area The category “Unprotected accident area” refers to the timeframe following the actual occurrence of an accident and the timing when the police has managed to secure the location of the accident (by adequate signage, isolation of debris and oil spillages, removal of disabled vehicles, ... )

Unsecured accident area


Category Description

Short term roadworks The category “short term roadworks” refers to any temporary work being carried-on the road or on the side of the road under a minimal signage because of the short-term nature of the work. An obvious example would be the moving works required to cut trees and bushes along the highways.

Clearance work

Maintenance work

Slow moving maintenance vehicles

Exceptional Weather The category “exceptional weather” refers to weather situations which can makes driving exceptionally difficult and potentially hazardous. An obvious example is heavy snowfall.

Heavy rain/snowfall

Gales

storm force winds / cross winds

Table 1: TISA recommended safety-relevant message categories


4.3 TPEG message management tests Tests are planned for interoperability testing of TPEG traffic service provider and TPEG client message

management. The following three test cases detail these tests.


TPEG message management tests

TPEG-4. Test:

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station 1, or TPEG over HTTP connection, including various TEC and TFP messages.

2. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames where a subset of TEC and TFP messages has been explicitly cancelled:

Same message ID, cancel flag=True in MMC, no application container, no location container.

Expected result:

Subsets of messages which are cancelled in updated content are not shown anymore. Test criteria to be checked:

Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor, both before and after update.

For each message o Increased MMC version number for cancel message

(modulo 255).

o Same or Increased expiration time for cancel message o No application container, nor LRC in cancel message o What time did elapse until a canceled message disappears

on the TPEG client?

Validation of TPEG message management: cancellations

TPEG-5. Test:

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station 1, or TPEG over HTTP connection, including various TEC and TFP messages.

2. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames where the content of subset of TEC and TFP messages has been updated:

TEC: new causes and/or shifted locations

TFP: New traffic states/shifted vector section locations Expected result:

Subsets of messages which have their content updated are shown with that updated content. Test criteria to be checked:

Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor, both before and after update.

Displayed content of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor, both before and after update

For each message o Increased MMC version number for the updated message

(modulo 255).

o Same or Increased expiration time for updated message o What time did elapse before a message update is shown in

the TPEG client?

Validation of TPEG message management: updates



TPEG-6. Test:

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, including various TEC and TFP messages.

2. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames where a subset of TEC and TFP messages have been taken out, others have expiration time updated.

Expected result:

Subset of messages which are taken out in updated content are not shown anymore, after their original expiration time has passed Test criteria to be checked:

Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor, both before/after expiration time of original messages, when expiration time not updated.

Displayed content of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor, both before and after update.

What time did elapse before an expired messages is removed from the TPEG client UI after expiration time has passed

Validation of TPEG message management: expiration

Further evaluation criteria for Message Management Tests:

Messages from two different services shall not update each other.

Messages from two different service components with different COID shall not update each other

Messages from switched of stations expire and are removed from the client display.

What time does elapse until a message change is visible to the user in the TPEG client?

Is there a noticeable difference between a test TPEG client (e.g. TPEG Analyser) and the display on

the TPEG client? How large is the delay?


Service providers should create TPEG test data with at least SNI and TEC messages and optionally TFP

messages.

The base message set shall contain the “starting” point of the message management test, and represent

the “before” situation:

Base Set: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): normal TEC and (optional) TFP messages

Furthermore, three delta message sets are needed:

Cancel Set: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): Cancellations for subset of “Base Set” messages.

Content Update Set: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): Updates for a subset of “Base Set”

messages with different content and/or locations.


Expiration Time Update Set: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): Subset of “Base Set” messages

with only the Message Experation time update in the MMC container.

Note: For the test case TPEG-5, it is needed that service providers can create/transmit message sets

based on actual current time. For test cases TPEG-3 and TPEG-4, message sets with an expiration time

beyond December 11, 2013 (end of the 2nd TPEG Testfest) will suffice.



4.4 User Interface and usability tests Tests are planned for user interface and usability of TPEG services and TPEG clients.

Note: these Test cases may be verified adjacent to and simultaneous with the Test cases described in

the previous sections.


TPEG user Interface and usability tests

TPEG-7. Test

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, including various TEC and TFP messages, as transmitted/provided for an average service coverage area.

Expected result:


Number of messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor

For at least 5 TEC messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic editor - At least first (five) causes in TEC message present in the TPEG client - Cause or subcause text corresponding to translation - Does the device support other languages than english? Is the content shown as expected in another language? - Is a textual representation of the location given? Does this description match the map display/source information? Is the resolution of the location identical to the one encoded? - Are messages without a map matching to a road still displayed on the screen?

For at least 5 TFP messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic

editor

- Traffic flow states of subparts of locations corresponding to traffic editor/service provider Is the resolution of the location identical to the one encoded? - Are messages without a map matching to a road still displayed on the screen?

Validation of user interface and display with normal TEC and TFP messages



TPEG user Interface and usability tests

TPEG-8. Test

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames, with TISA-prepared safety-relevant TEC messages, transmitted/provided for a normal service coverage area.

Expected result:


Number of safety-relevant messages in the TPEG client corresponding to broadcast/ traffic editor

For the set of TISA prepared Safety-relevant messages - Location and directions indeed corresponding to those in traffic editor - At least first (five) causes in TEC message present in the TPEG client - Cause or subcause text corresponding to TISA translation - Is the UI providing a user warning appropriate with the signaled warning level? - Does the device support other languages than English? Is the content shown as expected in another language? - Is a textual representation of the location given? Does this description match the map display/source information? Is the resolution of the location identical to the one encoded? - Are messages without a map matching to a road still displayed on the screen?

Interoperability validation for Safety-Relevant messages as defined by TISA

Further evaluation criteria for user Interface and usability tests:

For message management changes (updates/cancellations/expirations)

Is there a noticeable difference between a test TPEG client (e.g. TPEG Analyser) and the display on

the TPEG client? How large is the delay?


Service providers should create TPEG test data as follows:

TPEG-6: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): normal TEC and TFP messages. Some TEC messages

could have (TMC) area locations.

(Optionally) TPEG-7: Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany): safety relevant TEC messages.

Note: TISA will prepare a standard test set for test case TPEG-7 where safety-relevant TEC messages

again draw from Table 1.



4.5 TPEG service discovery tests (TPEG over DAB as bearer) Additional tests are planned for TPEG service discovery functionality in TPEG clients. The following three

test cases are meant to check different service change-over scenarios when using DAB as a bearer.


TPEG service discovery tests

TPEG-9. Test:

1. Delivery of TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station 1. 2. Stop transmission station 1. 3. Commence transmission broadcast radio station 2 on different

frequency for adjacent service. 4. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station 2. Expected result:

Seamless TPEG traffic content update after switching of broadcast radio station 1 to broadcast radio station 2 (same service) Test criteria to be checked:

Time to detection loss of signal station 1

Time from loss of signal station 1 to tuning of station 2 o Tuning to same service

Time from tuning to station 2 to showing messages from station 2

Continuity of same service over frequency change

TPEG-10. Test:


frequency for adjacent service. 4. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station 2. Expected result:

Seamless TPEG traffic content update after switch broadcast radio station 1 to broadcast radio station 2 (different services) Test criteria to be checked:


Time from loss of signal station 1 to tuning of station 2 o Tuning to new, but appropriate service

Time from tuning new station to showing messages from station 2

Continuity of public service following over service change in same country

TPEG-11. Test:


frequency for adjacent service. 4. Delivery of updated TPEG traffic frames via broadcast radio station

2. Expected result:

Seamless TPEG traffic content update after switch broadcast radio station 1 to broadcast radio station 2 (different service in different country) Test criteria to be checked:


Time from loss of signal station 1 to tuning of station 2 o Tuning to new, but appropriate service

Time from tuning new station to showing messages from station 2

Continuity of public service following over service change to new country



Service providers should create TPEG test data with at least SNI and TEC for four different

stations/frequencies as follows:

Station 1: Frequency 1, Service SID 1, country 1 (Germany)



Station 4: Frequency 4, Service SID 3, country 2 (France, Switzerland, or Austria)


Note: For available frequencies within the Testfest, facilities at IRT please refer to document TTF13003.

Test broadcasts for different stations shall have ideally different, non-overlapping TEC messages.

Advanced test data may contain additional SNI / tuning contents as follows:

Basic SNI only (GST 1: Fast tuning/ GST7: Versioning)

SNI with Bearer Linkage information to find other stations/frequencies

Additional DAB bearer support (FIC)

Furthermore, availability of encrypted service test data is helpful to perform a next level test with

presence of other stations/frequencies with a non-relevant/non-selectable TPEG service (e.g.

commercial encrypted) to challenge TPEG clients.


5 Agenda The Testfest starts with registration on Monday December 9th 2013 at Noon

The TPEG Testfest is combined with the TISA December committee meetings as the schedule indicates

above. It is hoped that minimizing travel costs and times best serves the needs of TISA’s members.

9-Dec 10-Dec 11-Dec 12-Dec 13-Dec

Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

9:00

10:00

11:00

12:00 Arrival & Registration

13:00

14:00

15:00

16:00

17:00 Tear-down

TISA 2nd TPEG Testfest

Proposed Schedule

Testsession 1 Testsession 3Products Committee

Wrap-upSetup and configuration Testsession 2

Technical & Standardisation

Committee

Content & Service Provision

Committee


6 Scheduling (Pairing Plan) A test schedule and pairing will be prepared based on the information and preferences provided by the

participants on beforehand. The pairing as well as possible will match the capabilities of client devices to

the appropriate service providers. The initial pairing will be presented on the starting day of the

Testfest; only small modifications are possible during the remainder of the event.

7 Discussion Forum Ideas, issues you would like to share with the participants? You can use the TPEG Testfest discussion

forum available on the intranet:

http://www.tisa.org/intranet/forums/TPEGTestfest/

8 Travel, Accommodation The installation and setup will start on Monday 9 December 2013 from 12:30h. Participants can easily

travel in the morning.

Introduction will start at 13:00h with presentation of the pairing sessions.

** It is strongly recommended to participate the full duration of the vent (2 ½ days) to get full

benefit for you and the other participants.**

8.1 Venue IRT – Institut für Rundfunktechnik

Floriansmühlstrasse 60, 80939 Munich, Germany

Room : A116

Directions can be obtained online from: http://www.irt.de/en/irt/directions.html

8.2 Hotel booking Closer to the TPEG test this section will contain recommended hotels for the TPEG TestFest with

confirmed rates. TISA will inform registered participants when reservations can be made at rates

secured by IRT

IRT wil make a block reservation in 2 hotels. You need to make the room reservation yourself.

http://www.tisa.org/intranet/forums/TPEGTestFest/

http://www.irt.de/en/irt/directions.html


Once confirmed rates are available, then we recommend to proceed with the hotel booking ASAP. After

the deadline the hotels cannot guarantee any rooms.

Hotel Leopold ***

Leopoldstraße 119, 80804 Munich

Tel: +49 89 36 70 61 / Fax: +49 89 36 04 31 50

[email protected]

http://www.hotel-leopold.de

Price indicative 89 € / night incl breakfast (Single room) (to be confirmed)

Booking code: IRT

Booking deadline: TBD

Fleming’s Hotel Munich-Schwabing ****

Leopoldstraße 130-132, 80804 Munich

Tel: +49 89 2060900 / Fax: +49 89 206090999

[email protected]

http://www.flemings-hotels.com/hotels/flemings-hotelmuenchen-schwabing/info.html

Price: indicative 94 € / night incl. breakfast (Single room) (to be confirmed)

Booking IRT

Booking deadline: TBD

Both hotels are located 20-30 minutes from/ to IRT:

Take U-Bahn 6, Stop is "Dietlindenstrasse"

o Get off at "Studentenstadt"

o Take the bus 181 and get off at "Bayerischer Rundfunk, BR" or take a taxi (about 3 km)

OR

o Get off at "Freimann" IRT can be reached by 20 minutes walking distance. Also the

walking distance from BR gate to IRT is 5 minutes.

9 Registered Participants **to be updated**

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.hotel-leopold.de/

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.flemings-hotels.com/hotels/flemings-hotelmuenchen-schwabing/info.html


10 Social event on Tuesday 10th December 2013, from 19:00 On Tuesday 10th December 2013, 19:00h, you are cordially invited to join us for a social dinner in the historical city centre of Munich. Details will be provided as soon as possible.

ttf13001 tpeg testfest handbook - tisa.org€¦ · 02b 06 -mar-13 additions and restructuring of...

Documents