Advanced Media Delivery (AMD) - In-band reporting of CMCD information - CMCD Provisioning

[dsilhavy]

Description

The 5GMSd Application Provider provisions the CMCD reporting via reference point M1 of the 5GMSd Application Function

Implementation

To be defined

Example

[shilinding]

For CMCD provisioning via M1, there are two possible approaches:

• Capability Set Provisioning: The 5GMSd Application Provider provisions a set of supported transmission modes, allowing the player on the UE side to select its preferred mode.
• Direct Mode Provisioning: The 5GMSd Application Provider directly provisions a specific mode for the player.

The first approach is more flexible and player-friendly, as it empowers the player to choose the most suitable mode. However, if this approach is adopted, the player need to let the AF/AS know the selected mode to ensure proper coordination.

@rjb1000 @dsilhavy @haudiobe May I know your opinion on this? Thanks

[rjb1000]

Interesting ideas, @shilinding

Working backwards from the 5GMS AS, I think it would be simpler to just specify that it needs to support both HTTP request headers and URL query parameters at reference point M4d.

As for configuring which of these the Media Player should use, a client API at reference point M7/M11 seems appropriate, and I have suggested one in my draft Change Request 26512-CR0089r1.

Then it's question of whether the Media Session Handler invokes this API at M11 based on Service Access Information received at M5 and provisioned at M1 (your Capability Set Provisioning option), or whether the 5GMS-Aware Application invokes it directly via M7, based on application information received via M8 (your Direct Mode option).

Firstly, I'm not sure why empowering the Media Player to make the most suitable choice requires explicit co-ordination with the AF/AS. If we just specify that the 5GMS AS must accept either, the Media Player doesn't need to tell any other entity which choice it has made: it just goes ahead and does whatever it likes or has been told to do.

Secondly, I think there are additional options available:
3. The 5GMSd Application Provider doesn't provision the set of supported transmission modes at M1, and the Media Player is free to make its own choice.
4. The 5GMSd Application Provider doesn't provision the set of supported transmission modes at M1, and the Media Session Handler configures the transmission mode for the Media Player to use via an M11 client API.
5. The 5GMSd Application Provider doesn't provision the set of supported transmission modes at M1, and the 5GMSd-Aware Application configures the transmission mode for the Media Player to use via an M7 client API,

I'm really not sure what the pros and cons of the five available options are at this point!

[shilinding]

Thanks @rjb1000 . This has been a very helpful discussion.

I agree that it's not strictly necessary for the AF/AS to know which mode the UE selected when Capability Set Provisioning is used. However, in that case, the AS would need to monitor all possible modes and detect where the report was delivered. This approach is less explicit and requires more effort from the AS compared to simply being informed of the selected mode—but it's still manageable.

Regarding the five options, I believe the #1~#4 are all feasible. And I have a question about option #5: you mentioned using M5 to MSH, and M7 from the 5GMSd-Aware Application to the Media Player. But how does the information from MSH to the 5GMSd-Aware Application? Would it be: from the 5GMSd Application Provider to the 5GMSd-Aware Application via M8, and then via M7 to the Media Player?

Among the five options, I feel the #2(Direct Mode Provisioning) is the most straightforward and explicit. It simplifies provisioning for the Application Provider and removes the need for the AS to monitor multiple reporting paths.

By the way, I’m currently drafting a CR on “CMCD provisioning (M1d) and configuration (M5d)” for TS 26.510 updates. I may not have enough time to get your feedback before submission—do you think it’s OK to submit it first and discuss it with you afterward? And for the M1 part, it might make sense to align or possibly merge it with your contribution afterward.