One of my biggest doubts regarding DVB-I has been around the question of how and by whom the central service registry would be managed.
Who would act as the reliable record keeper? How would the costs be divided among stakeholders? Who would decide which services are included in the registry? Could stakeholders in any market come to an agreement on this?
Then I realized that this dilemma applies only to the horizontal market, if even there. Let me elaborate on this thought further.
Managing service registries in DVB-I: horizontal and vertical market perspectives
The most critical technical component of DVB-I’s ecosystem is the service registry—a database that contains the available channels and services (including metadata like content descriptions, EPG data, and delivery mechanisms). The effective management of service registries can vary significantly depending on the market structure—whether it’s a horizontal market or a vertical one.
Understanding how to manage service registries in both scenarios is key to unlocking the business potential of DVB-I.
Key decision for your business case – delivery of the central service registry
There are multiple ways to provide CE devices with the “link” to the central service registry, and the best approach depends on your business needs as a DVB operator or OTT player.
In short, the options are:
- Via DVB Broadcast: The broadcast signal (DVB-T/C/S) can carry service list descriptors as part of its metadata, which includes URLs to the DVB-I service registry. When a TV tunes into a DVB broadcast, it reads this metadata to find the URL of the service registry that will provide additional internet-based services.
- Pre-configured by Operator or Manufacturer: If you control the smart TVs or set-top box you could pre-configure URLs to the central service registry. When a TV is set up for the first time or when connecting to a network, it uses these pre-configured URLs to fetch available DVB-I services.
- DNS-based Service Discovery: The TV or client device can use DNS to discover the service registry. By querying a specific domain or subdomain, the device can retrieve the URL of the service registry from the DNS response, much like how web addresses are resolved on the internet.
- In certain network configurations, multicast announcements can provide the link to the service registry. Devices that are connected to the network listen for these announcements and use the provided URL to access the service registry and fetch service lists.
In addition to a native DVB-I EPG application, an HbbTV/Op-app application broadcasted or downloaded onto the TV could be used to provide the UX to the end-user (in addition to the basic DVB-based service offering). This would also work on CE devices that do not natively support DVB-I. How about mobile or desktop devices? For these, the DVB-I service registry address would need to be configured within the application or web page settings.
As shown above, DVB-I as a standard allows you to leverage it in various ways, depending on how you want to connect with your viewers.
Horizontal market is more challenging
By a horizontal market, I refer to a broad, multi-provider environment where various content providers or broadcasters coexist and compete. A typical example would be DVB-T countries with multiple multiplex operators, each managing their own channel lineups. In these markets, consumers may also have hybrid devices that support both satellite and IP-based services.
The primary challenge here is to ensure interoperability, consistency, and ease of access to channels across all providers within a shared ecosystem. The more players, the more hassle.
In my opinion, competition is essential, and service providers (e.g., terrestrial versus satellite) should be able to differentiate themselves. Does it even make sense to have a combined service registry for a satellite, a terrestrial, and an OTT operator? Probably not, although some consumers with a dual-tuner STB would love it.
Key aspects of managing a service registry in a horizontal market
In a horizontal market, the service registry must support a wide range of broadcasters, each potentially using different content formats, delivery mechanisms, and metadata standards. As we all know, there are almost as many EPG formats, metadata descriptions, and content discovery mechanisms as there are players in the market. Aggregating these behind a single DVB-I service platform makes a lot of sense; the standardization that DVB-I brings would significantly aid this effort.
Each broadcaster and content owner can maintain their own service registries, which can then be aggregated in a standardized way to form a shared registry. This approach would allow users to discover services from multiple broadcasters within a unified EPG, thereby increasing the chances of content discovery. As mentioned above, managing such a shared registry requires close coordination between service providers to ensure timely updates, such as new channels or schedule changes.
DVB-I aims to provide users with the best experience and the easiest way to find their favorite content. However, should users have the option to choose between different registry providers and content offerings? This brings us back to a fundamental question in business: who owns the viewers?
Should CE device manufacturers offer end users access to multiple central service registries – one from the DVB operator, another from the CE manufacturer, and a third from the highest-paying OTT provider?
Recent European DVB-I trials have attempted to address these questions. All of the latest trials have focused on the horizontal market needs within a single DVB platform, primarily DVB-T. The main stakeholders in these trials have been national broadcasters and terrestrial network operators. It is evident that the standard will be influenced by TV regulators and broadcasters, who intend to make DVB-I compatibility mandatory for televisions sold in their markets. However, it is important to note that DVB-I is equally effective for mobile and desktop devices.
In the German trial, a key takeaway was the importance of managing service lists with regionalization in mind. The trial included an aggregation service that combines service lists from various broadcasters, enabling the formation of a national list while preserving regional variations in channel listings. The trial highlighted that broadcasters must implement HbbTV to fully leverage DVB-I’s capabilities, such as targeted advertising and accessible services.
The Spanish trial highlighted DVB-I's potential to enable more diverse content offerings. Broadcasters can introduce niche channels and services to attract various audience segments and monetize them through targeted advertising and subscription models.
In Italy, a hybrid approach is seen as crucial for the future of broadcasting, allowing viewers to access both live and on-demand content via a unified interface. Trials with Vestel and Mediaset demonstrated how DVB-I can complement existing broadcast networks by offering internet-delivered linear services in full HD and additional services utilizing HbbTV.
However, the key decision regarding who will manage the central service registry remains unresolved. If regulators succeed in mandating DVB-I for CE devices, I am confident that DVB operators will seek to become the registry controllers, as they have been for decades in broadcast networks.
Vertical market service registry management
A vertical market is one where a single operator controls most or all aspects of the content delivery chain, from content production and acquisition to delivery and user experience.
For me, using DVB-I in a vertical market is a no-brainer. Why?
First and foremost, DVB-I offers a standardized way for hybrid service management. Since vertical operators often control the end-user devices (such as set-top boxes or smart TVs), the service registry can be optimized specifically for those devices. Regardless of the device receiving the service list, operators can rely on a single EPG approach. This simplifies operations and creates cost savings while fostering a platform-agnostic approach.
Vertical operators managing both traditional broadcast and IP-delivered content can integrate these services seamlessly within the EPG. This is a major benefit of DVB-I, as it enables operators to use their proprietary service registry to manage both types of content in a unified manner. The result is a smooth, cross-platform experience for users, eliminating the need to switch between apps or devices.
With full control over the service registry, operators can create a more tailored and controlled user experience. This flexibility allows them to design a bespoke EPG that aligns perfectly with their brand and content offerings. The registry can be optimized for the operator’s specific platform, whether that’s satellite, terrestrial, or a hybrid IP solution (including mobile and desktop).
Since operators typically have subscribers, there is significant potential to leverage user data for personalized EPG experiences, enhancing content personalization. The service registry can dynamically adapt to display tailored content recommendations based on viewing history, subscription tier, or user demographics, which can significantly boost viewer engagement and satisfaction.
Additionally, vertical market operators can maximize their revenue potential by using the service registry to implement exclusive offers and premium content. For instance, pay-per-view sports events or subscription-based on-demand content can be prominently featured in the EPG.
Operators may also control ad inventory, enabling them to implement highly targeted in-platform advertising campaigns based on data derived from the service registry.
Personally, I see no reason for operators not to consider upgrading to DVB-I. This transition can be executed one device platform at a time, ultimately streamlining channel and service management in the long run.
Conclusion
The future of DVB-I hinges on resolving the central service registry management dilemma. Trials across Europe have highlighted its potential, but the key question remains: who will manage the central service registry? In a horizontal market – where multiple broadcasters and service providers operate – issues such as interoperability, stakeholder agreements, and service inclusivity pose significant challenges.
In contrast, in vertical markets, where a single operator controls the entire delivery chain, registry management is simpler. Operators can fully leverage the flexibility of DVB-I to create tailored user experiences, simplify hybrid broadcast management, and enhance personalized content recommendations, all while optimizing revenues through exclusive offerings and targeted ads.
Ultimately, DVB-I is poised to improve user satisfaction by bridging the gap between traditional broadcasting and IP-delivered content. For DVB-I to succeed, especially in horizontal markets, strong cooperation and a regulatory framework will be necessary. Only then can the true business potential of DVB-I be unlocked.
Read more about our DVB-I Platform: https://icareus.com/dvb-i/
Icareus Ltd is established 2001 and has a headquarters in Helsinki, Finland. Combining online and broadcast technologies have been the core of our activities over two decades, true pioneers some say. We’ve been making the change from linear TV to today’s multi-screen experience. Icareus solutions are enjoyed by millions of consumers via our broadcaster, operator, OTT and OVP customers in over 60 countries.
Icareus TV & Video Cloud and Icareus Playout, a trusted broadcast platform for EPG, Data carousels and OTA support solutions for HbbTV, OTT, TV Everywhere, Addressable TV advertising and Audience Measurement.
For more Information:
Ms. Jessica Glad
Marketing
Icareus Ltd
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: +358 (0)9 2289 0801
Follow Icareus on:
