Digital Media Production <br />
Research and Development +/- 22 experts<br />Member of international associations<br />EBU  (P/SCAIE, P/MAG, P/NP, P/HDTV,...
3<br />Overview<br /><ul><li>Background
 File Based Media Production
 Media Asset Management
Future Internet</li></li></ul><li>Front-End<br />Back-Office<br />Retail<br />Creation<br />Meta-data<br />Essence<br />Pr...
Future Media - Assumptions<br />5<br />Non-linear Distribution<br />IP(<> FM, DAB, DVB) enables seamless integration of li...
6<br />‘IP-ICT Acceptance’ Time Line<br />SuperNet I<br />In production<br />SuperNet II<br />In production<br />SuperNet ...
 2001: Excuse me, I’m from IT … (checkpoint)
 2002: IP will be the ‘future’ network technology for TV production
 2003: TV production will be ICT-architecture based !!!
 2003: BBC states ‘TV production to be “tapeless” in 2010 (->2008) !!!’
 2004: Tapeless-, server- and file- based TV production generally accepted as model</li></li></ul><li>2004...<br />
2004...<br />
9<br />Digital Media Production<br />Suprastructure – Metadata management<br />Production and distribution<br />Production...
10<br />Challenge 1 - Infrastructure<br />Suprastructure – Metadata management<br />Production and distribution<br />Editi...
11<br />Challenge 2 – Digital Asset Management<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Communication<br />(Informatio...
12<br />Challenge 2 - Digital AssetManagement<br />Suprastructure – MetadataMgnt<br />Production and distribution<br />Inf...
13<br />Challenge 2 – Digital Asset Management<br />?<br />
14<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
File-based Media Production
 Media Asset Management
Future Internet
 Design requirements – Facts and Figures
 The network
 The Hard Disc
 The File System</li></li></ul><li>15<br />File Based Media Production<br />Concurrent<br />engineering<br />Processing <b...
16<br />Principles<br />OSI 7 layer model<br />Application Layer<br />Application Layer<br />?<br />Presentation Layer<br ...
By using generic technology, the central media infrastructure and the local media specific work-centres should be integrat...
The basic technology components or technologicallayers of the architectural model should be deployed in a modular way such...
 Uncompressed video (SDI):  270 Mbps
 Compressed video (Contribution Q.) (HQ): 50 Mbps
 Compressed video (Contribution Q.) (news): 8 Mbps
 Compressed video (Distribution Q.): 5-6 Mbps
 Browse video (low resolution): 1.5-4 Mbps</li></ul>Professional<br />audio quality:<br />( 256 kbps – 1.5 Mbps)<br /><ul>...
 Compressed audio : ~ 256 kbps    audio editing: simultaneous 4 streams=> 1 Mbps</li></li></ul><li>18<br />Facts and Figur...
19<br />~ 200 // H-Res  video clients simultaneous access   at 500 Mbit/s / client (H-Res video: 50 Mbit/s)   (= 10 x 50 M...
20<br />Target architectural model:<br />~ 200 // H-Res  video clients simultaneous access   at 500 Mbit/s / client (H-Res...
High Definition Media Production Infrastructure<br />Media<br />File System <br />( GPFS, AVID-ISIS, Isilon, Omneon Media ...
22<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
 File-based Media Production
 Media Asset Management
Future Internet
 Design requirements – Facts and Figures
The network
 The Hard Disc
 The File System</li></li></ul><li>23<br /><ul><li> At most suitable for an office environment
 Slow
 Packet loss
 No Quality of Service
 Interruptions are generally accepted
 Not fault-tolerant</li></ul>And not<br /><ul><li> …
Always available !
No loss of data !
Perfect quality guaranteed!</li></ul>IP is “Best Effort”<br />Internet  a most poor implementation of IP<br />
24<br />Ethernet - Carrier Sense/Collision Detect<br />
25<br />Carrier Sense - Multiple Access / with Collision Detection<br />Carrier<br /><ul><li> Shared carrier (coax cable o...
 Half Duplex (exclusively directional)
 CSMA/CD (collision mechanism)</li></ul>Ethernet - Carrier Sense/Collision Detect<br />
26<br />> 60 %<br />load<br /><ul><li> # collisions takes overhead=> more traffic=> mechanisme is critical!!!=> packet los...
 Best fit = equilibrium between  nett troughput and #collisions</li></ul>t<br />30 %<br />load<br />#p<br />t<br />collisi...
27<br />100 %<br />load<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />95 %<br />load<br />60 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />l...
28<br />or<br />is this behavior typicalto the way it is <br />implemented?<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />Is this behavior<br...
29<br />Point-to-point<br />switched ethernet (L2)<br /><ul><li> Full Duplex (bidirectional) traffic possible</li></ul>L2 ...
30<br /><ul><li> Delay ???=> L2-‘wirespeed’ switching</li></ul>L2 Switch<br /><ul><li> Pakketloss ???=> ‘non-blocking’=> N...
 Collisions !!!!!! Full-Dupplex !!!</li></ul>100 % efficiency !<br />100 %<br />load<br />95 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />lo...
31<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />L2 Switch<br />Swi...
 Unvisible
 No pakket loss
 100 % efficiency</li></ul>Root<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />S...
 Visible
 Pakket loss
 Max 30%    efficiency</li></ul>Error resilience – Spanning Tree<br />
32<br />L2 Switch<br />L3<br />Routing<br />Switch<br />Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
 Invisible
 No packet loss
 100 % efficiency</li></ul>L3<br />/L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br ...
 Visible
 Pakket loss
 Max 30%    efficiency</li></ul>Error resilience - OSPF<br />
33<br />L2 Switch<br />Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
 Invisible
 No packet loss
 100 % efficiency
 Limited resilience</li></ul>Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
 Invisible
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Digital Media Production - Future Internet

1,834

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Comment
10 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Walaupun presentation ini agak panjang, ianya berbaloi untuk dibaca kerana isi kandungan yang menarik. Saya berminat untuk embed ke dalam website saya, iaitu www.ringtonesz.org/ dan www.lyrics-search.org/

    Ahmad Said.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,834
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
1
Likes
10
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • SMPTE: Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers.SMPTE serves its members with the latest technology information and education on a rapidly changing industry. SMPTE also is an accredited and globally-respected industry standards-setting body.
  • In principe: - Automatisch verwerking metadata- Automatisch generatie metadata- Beter indexering en zoeken in (bestaande) meta- &amp; mediadata
  • Digital Media Production - Future Internet

    1. 1. Digital Media Production <br />
    2. 2. Research and Development +/- 22 experts<br />Member of international associations<br />EBU (P/SCAIE, P/MAG, P/NP, P/HDTV,…)<br />AMWA, SMPTE, IPTC, W3C<br />Deliverables<br />Expertise<br />Proof of Concept<br />Technology transfer<br />VRT-medialab<br />http://medialab.vrt.be<br />
    3. 3. 3<br />Overview<br /><ul><li>Background
    4. 4. File Based Media Production
    5. 5. Media Asset Management
    6. 6. Future Internet</li></li></ul><li>Front-End<br />Back-Office<br />Retail<br />Creation<br />Meta-data<br />Essence<br />Production<br />Distribution<br />Digital Media<br />
    7. 7. Future Media - Assumptions<br />5<br />Non-linear Distribution<br />IP(<> FM, DAB, DVB) enables seamless integration of live and on-demand<br />Software-based Receivers<br />API’s and application frameworks enable independant software development <br />3rd party integration increasses application intelligence<br />Versatile Content<br />From mobile, standard-def and high-definition to scalable content<br />http://labs.vrt.be/myradio<br />
    8. 8. 6<br />‘IP-ICT Acceptance’ Time Line<br />SuperNet I<br />In production<br />SuperNet II<br />In production<br />SuperNet II 10 Gb<br />In production<br />Start project<br />SuperNet I<br />Concept<br />SuperNet II<br />VRT<br />Tapeless<br />VRT<br />2005<br />2001<br />2000<br />2002<br />2003<br />2004<br />2010<br />IBC<br />2003<br />A’dam<br />(NL)<br />IBC<br />2002<br />A’dam<br />(NL)<br />EBU<br />Geneva<br />(CH)<br />TV World-<br />forum<br />Montreux<br />(CH)<br />BBC TV <br />Production<br />=<br />“tapeless”<br />Media<br />world<br />NAB<br />2004<br />Las Vegas<br />(US)<br />Olympic<br />Games<br />2008<br />(China)<br />AVID<br />Boston<br />(US)<br /><ul><li> 2000: ‘IP no way’ !!! (broadcasters)
    9. 9. 2001: Excuse me, I’m from IT … (checkpoint)
    10. 10. 2002: IP will be the ‘future’ network technology for TV production
    11. 11. 2003: TV production will be ICT-architecture based !!!
    12. 12. 2003: BBC states ‘TV production to be “tapeless” in 2010 (->2008) !!!’
    13. 13. 2004: Tapeless-, server- and file- based TV production generally accepted as model</li></li></ul><li>2004...<br />
    14. 14. 2004...<br />
    15. 15. 9<br />Digital Media Production<br />Suprastructure – Metadata management<br />Production and distribution<br />Production and distribution<br />Editing<br />Mastering<br />Media AssetMgnt<br />System<br />Ingest<br />Playout<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    16. 16. 10<br />Challenge 1 - Infrastructure<br />Suprastructure – Metadata management<br />Production and distribution<br />Editing<br />Mastering<br />Media Asset Mgnt<br />Ingest<br />Playout<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    17. 17. 11<br />Challenge 2 – Digital Asset Management<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Communication<br />(Information)<br />Suprastructure – Metadata management<br />Production and distribution<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    18. 18. 12<br />Challenge 2 - Digital AssetManagement<br />Suprastructure – MetadataMgnt<br />Production and distribution<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    19. 19. 13<br />Challenge 2 – Digital Asset Management<br />?<br />
    20. 20. 14<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    21. 21. File-based Media Production
    22. 22. Media Asset Management
    23. 23. Future Internet
    24. 24. Design requirements – Facts and Figures
    25. 25. The network
    26. 26. The Hard Disc
    27. 27. The File System</li></li></ul><li>15<br />File Based Media Production<br />Concurrent<br />engineering<br />Processing <br />during<br />ingest/transfer<br />Browse Clients<br />Craft editors<br />POST<br />Production<br />Draft <br />Processing<br />Subtitling <br />Analysis<br />INGEST<br />RECORD<br />PLAY-OUT<br />Fibre, <br />satellite<br />Faster than real-time<br />Central storage<br />Archiving<br />Annotation<br />Follow-up<br />continuity<br />Post-<br />sonorisation<br />Editor-in-Chief<br />
    28. 28. 16<br />Principles<br />OSI 7 layer model<br />Application Layer<br />Application Layer<br />?<br />Presentation Layer<br />Presentation Layer<br />Session Layer<br />Session Layer<br />Transport Layer<br />Transport Layer<br />Network Layer<br />Network Layer<br />Data Link Layer<br />Data Link Layer<br />Physical Layer<br />Physical Layer<br />Virtual connection<br /><ul><li>Paradigm: File Based media production
    29. 29. By using generic technology, the central media infrastructure and the local media specific work-centres should be integrated agnostically from each others technical implementations.
    30. 30. The basic technology components or technologicallayers of the architectural model should be deployed in a modular way such that they can be exchanged/ replaced by future technological components without compromising the basic architectural model. (Cfr. OSI model)</li></li></ul><li>17<br />Facts and Figures<br />Professional<br />video quality:<br />(5 Mbps – 2,5 Gbps)<br /><ul><li> Uncompressed video (High Definition): 2.5 Gbps
    31. 31. Uncompressed video (SDI): 270 Mbps
    32. 32. Compressed video (Contribution Q.) (HQ): 50 Mbps
    33. 33. Compressed video (Contribution Q.) (news): 8 Mbps
    34. 34. Compressed video (Distribution Q.): 5-6 Mbps
    35. 35. Browse video (low resolution): 1.5-4 Mbps</li></ul>Professional<br />audio quality:<br />( 256 kbps – 1.5 Mbps)<br /><ul><li> Uncompressed audio : ~ 1.5 Mbps stream
    36. 36. Compressed audio : ~ 256 kbps audio editing: simultaneous 4 streams=> 1 Mbps</li></li></ul><li>18<br />Facts and Figures<br />Data Sources at VRT<br />~ 400.000 “Video-tapes”<br />+ 32.500 Video-tapes / year<br />=<br />~ 4 PB<br />+ 800 TB/y<br />~ 1.000.000 Items<br />+ 100.000 Items / year (=10%)<br />~ 250.000 CD & 40.000 Singles<br />+ 12.750 CD & 4250 Singles / year<br />=<br />165 TB<br />+ 8.5 TB/y<br />~ 2.500.000 Items<br />+ 130.000 Items / year (=5%)<br />
    37. 37. 19<br />~ 200 // H-Res video clients simultaneous access at 500 Mbit/s / client (H-Res video: 50 Mbit/s) (= 10 x 50 Mbit/s / client)<br />~ 3000 // L-Res<br /> video clients<br />Simultaneous access +<br />// Throughput ~ 10 GB/s<br />Ingest: <br />>= 10 feeds simultaneous 10 x faster than real time transcoding -> browse<br /> key-frame<br />Playout<br /># hrs H-Res video:<br /> ~150.000 hrs<br />On disk<br />Total storage: 4 PetaB (net)<br />on-line = on disk<br />Hiërarchical storage mgmt.<br />(on-line/near-line/off-line)<br />near-line = on data-tape<br />off-line = on data-tape (shelf)<br />Design Requirements<br />Media Asset Management<br />File-based / (video)tape-less<br />media environment<br />High Availability<br />
    38. 38. 20<br />Target architectural model:<br />~ 200 // H-Res video clients simultaneous access at 500 Mbit/s / client (H-Res video: 50 Mbit/s) (= 10 x 50 Mbit/s / client)<br />Media<br />Application<br />Behaviour<br />~ 3000 // L-Res<br /> video clients<br />Simultaneous access +<br />// Throughput ~ 10 GB/s<br />Ingest: <br />>= 10 feeds simultaneous 10 x faster than real time transcoding -> browse<br /> key-frame<br />Playout<br /># hrs H-Res video:<br /> ~150.000 hrs<br />On disk<br />Total storage: 4 PetaB (net)<br />on-line = on disk<br />0%<br />100%<br />Load<br />Hiërarchical storage mgmt.<br />(on-line/near-line/off-line)<br />near-line = on data-tape<br />off-line = on data-tape (shelf)<br />Media Asset Management<br />File-based / (video)tape-less<br />media environment<br />High Availability<br />Design Requirements<br />
    39. 39. High Definition Media Production Infrastructure<br />Media<br />File System <br />( GPFS, AVID-ISIS, Isilon, Omneon Media Grid, XSAN, … )<br />Network<br />( Disk network, SAN )<br />Hard Disk <br />Storage Architecture:<br />3 Key Components:<br /> 100 %<br />Efficiency<br />Geisha results IBC 2009<br />
    40. 40. 22<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    41. 41. File-based Media Production
    42. 42. Media Asset Management
    43. 43. Future Internet
    44. 44. Design requirements – Facts and Figures
    45. 45. The network
    46. 46. The Hard Disc
    47. 47. The File System</li></li></ul><li>23<br /><ul><li> At most suitable for an office environment
    48. 48. Slow
    49. 49. Packet loss
    50. 50. No Quality of Service
    51. 51. Interruptions are generally accepted
    52. 52. Not fault-tolerant</li></ul>And not<br /><ul><li> …
    53. 53. Always available !
    54. 54. No loss of data !
    55. 55. Perfect quality guaranteed!</li></ul>IP is “Best Effort”<br />Internet  a most poor implementation of IP<br />
    56. 56. 24<br />Ethernet - Carrier Sense/Collision Detect<br />
    57. 57. 25<br />Carrier Sense - Multiple Access / with Collision Detection<br />Carrier<br /><ul><li> Shared carrier (coax cable or hub)
    58. 58. Half Duplex (exclusively directional)
    59. 59. CSMA/CD (collision mechanism)</li></ul>Ethernet - Carrier Sense/Collision Detect<br />
    60. 60. 26<br />> 60 %<br />load<br /><ul><li> # collisions takes overhead=> more traffic=> mechanisme is critical!!!=> packet loss=> TCP (L4) slows down the network=> additional traffic and/or delay</li></ul>60 %<br />load<br />#p<br /><ul><li> More collisions => additional traffic=> Larger delays=> Netwerk becomes clearly visible
    61. 61. Best fit = equilibrium between nett troughput and #collisions</li></ul>t<br />30 %<br />load<br />#p<br />t<br />collision<br />#p<br /><ul><li> Collisions=> Delay=> Netwerk becomes visible sometimes</li></ul>5 %<br />load<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />“ Anyone gets fair access to the network ”<br />by CSMA/CD (collision mechanism)<br />Ethernet - Carrier Sense/Collision Detect<br />
    62. 62. 27<br />100 %<br />load<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />95 %<br />load<br />60 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Conventional IT network<br />Ideal network<br />Network Behavior<br />
    63. 63. 28<br />or<br />is this behavior typicalto the way it is <br />implemented?<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />Is this behavior<br />inherent to IP <br />60 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Conventional IT network<br />Network Behavior<br />
    64. 64. 29<br />Point-to-point<br />switched ethernet (L2)<br /><ul><li> Full Duplex (bidirectional) traffic possible</li></ul>L2 Switch<br /><ul><li> Simultanous access to the network</li></ul>shared ethernet (L2)<br />“ Anyone gets fair access to the network ”<br />by CSMA/CD (collision mechanism)<br />But: introduction of delays, visibility of the network, packet loss<br /><ul><li> Every single user has its dedicated link</li></ul>Point-to-point switched ethernet<br />
    65. 65. 30<br /><ul><li> Delay ???=> L2-‘wirespeed’ switching</li></ul>L2 Switch<br /><ul><li> Pakketloss ???=> ‘non-blocking’=> No ‘oversubscription’= any packet going in must come out of the network
    66. 66. Collisions !!!!!! Full-Dupplex !!!</li></ul>100 % efficiency !<br />100 %<br />load<br />95 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br /><ul><li> No collisions=> No delay=> Netwerk remains invisible</li></ul>5 %<br />load<br />Point-to-point switched ethernet<br />
    67. 67. 31<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />L2 Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />If properly configured:<br /><ul><li> No delay
    68. 68. Unvisible
    69. 69. No pakket loss
    70. 70. 100 % efficiency</li></ul>Root<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Root<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Root<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />Switch<br />shared ethernet (L2)<br />L2 Resilience mechanism= SPANNING TREE !!!<br /> => Failures propagate through the network !!!+ substantial failover+ inefficient use of network paths<br /><ul><li> Delay
    71. 71. Visible
    72. 72. Pakket loss
    73. 73. Max 30% efficiency</li></ul>Error resilience – Spanning Tree<br />
    74. 74. 32<br />L2 Switch<br />L3<br />Routing<br />Switch<br />Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
    75. 75. Invisible
    76. 76. No packet loss
    77. 77. 100 % efficiency</li></ul>L3<br />/L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />shared ethernet (L2)<br />L3 resilience mechanisme= OSPF Routing Protocol !!!<br /> => Failure is repaired locally in the network !!!+ short failover (< 5s)<br />+ all paths are being used<br /><ul><li> Delay
    78. 78. Visible
    79. 79. Pakket loss
    80. 80. Max 30% efficiency</li></ul>Error resilience - OSPF<br />
    81. 81. 33<br />L2 Switch<br />Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
    82. 82. Invisible
    83. 83. No packet loss
    84. 84. 100 % efficiency
    85. 85. Limited resilience</li></ul>Correct Configuration:<br /><ul><li> No delay
    86. 86. Invisible
    87. 87. No packet loss
    88. 88. 100 % efficiency
    89. 89. Optimal redundance</li></ul>L3 Routing switch<br />shared ethernet (L2)<br /><ul><li> Delay
    90. 90. Visible
    91. 91. Pakket loss
    92. 92. Max 30% efficiency</li></ul>Media network – L2 switching and L3 routing<br />
    93. 93. 34<br />Classical IT (IP) Network -> Media IP Network<br />100 %<br />load<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />≈<br />60 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Media IP network<br />Classical IT (IP) network<br />#p<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />collision<br />#p<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />
    94. 94. 35<br />Classical IT (IP) Network -> Media IP Network<br />100 %<br />load<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />≈<br />60 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Media IP network<br />Classical IT (IP) network<br />#p<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />collision<br />#p<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />Media Solution<br />AVID-ISIS<br /><ul><li>Non-Blocking
    95. 95. No Oversubscription
    96. 96. L2</li></li></ul><li>36<br />Classical IT (IP) Network -> Media IP Network<br />> 60 %<br />load<br />≈<br />60 %<br />load<br />30 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Classical IT (IP) network<br />#p<br />t<br />#p<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />t<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />L3<br />collision<br />#p<br />L3<br />L3<br />t<br />#p<br />t<br />100 %<br />load<br />50 %<br />load<br />5 %<br />load<br />Media IP network<br />Media Production Design Requirements:<br />Media Solution<br />AVID-ISIS<br /><ul><li>Non-Blocking
    97. 97. Non-Blocking
    98. 98. No Oversubscription
    99. 99. No Oversubscription
    100. 100. L2
    101. 101. L3 – Scalability/Redundancy</li></li></ul><li>37<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    102. 102. File-based Media Production
    103. 103. Media Asset Management
    104. 104. Future Internet
    105. 105. Design requirements – Facts and Figures
    106. 106. The network
    107. 107. The Hard Disc
    108. 108. The File System</li></li></ul><li>38<br />4/8 KB segment<br />Spindle<br />Arm<br />Arm pivot<br />Sector<br />Platters<br />Random R/W <br />8KB – 128 KB Segments<br />Random<br />8 KB segments<br />Random<br />128 KB segments<br />Cylinder<br />Arm assembly<br />Tracks<br />Heads<br />128 KB segment<br />R/W on the Outer Track<br />Full Stroke R/W<br /> 8KB – 128 KB Segments<br />Outer track<br />Full stroke<br />8 KB segments<br />Full stroke<br />128 KB segments<br />Inner track<br />R/W on the Inner Track<br /><ul><li>Large segment size-> Higher efficiency Hard Disk</li></ul>Hard Disk Model<br />
    109. 109. 39<br />Hard Disk model<br />Disk<br />Throughput<br />15 Krpm calculated results<br />10 Krpm calculated results<br />128 KB segments<br />8 KB segments<br />Testresults<br />78.2 MB/s<br />72.9 MB/s<br />71.5 MB/s<br />70 MB/s<br />66.7 MB/s<br />50 MB/s<br />50.9 MB/s<br />47.6 MB/s<br />39.4 MB/s<br />35.4 MB/s<br />30 MB/s<br />16.8 MB/s<br />14.8 MB/s<br />12.8 MB/s<br />12.2 MB/s<br />10 MB/s<br />9.1 MB/s<br />8.9 MB/s<br />0.91 MB/s<br />0.65 MB/s<br />0.92 MB/s<br />0.62 MB/s<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />Read load types<br />(1)<br />Sequential Read<br />Outer tracks<br />(2)<br />Sequential Read<br />Inner tracks<br />(3)<br />Random Read<br />Tot. Fragmented disk<br />128 KB / 8KB segments<br />(4)<br />Worst case Read<br />Tot. Fragmented disk<br />128 KB / 8KB segments<br />
    110. 110. 40<br />4/8 KB segment<br />Spindle<br />Arm<br />Arm pivot<br />Sector<br />Platters<br />Cylinder<br />Arm assembly<br />Tracks<br />Heads<br />128 KB segment<br />100+ HD’s<br />// Striping:<br /><ul><li>Large segment size-> Higher efficiency Hard Disk</li></ul>Media File<br />Media File<br />Media File<br />Media File<br /><ul><li>Fully fragmented: Random access without using any Hard Disk intelligence</li></ul>Hard Disk Model<br />
    111. 111. 41<br />Hard Disk model<br />Disk<br />Throughput<br />15 Krpm calculated results<br />10 Krpm calculated results<br />128 KB segments<br />8 KB segments<br />Testresults<br />78.2 MB/s<br />72.9 MB/s<br />71.5 MB/s<br />70 MB/s<br />66.7 MB/s<br />50 MB/s<br />50.9 MB/s<br />47.6 MB/s<br />39.4 MB/s<br />35.4 MB/s<br />30 MB/s<br />16.8 MB/s<br />14.8 MB/s<br />12.8 MB/s<br />12.2 MB/s<br />10 MB/s<br />9.1 MB/s<br />8.9 MB/s<br />0.91 MB/s<br />0.65 MB/s<br />0.92 MB/s<br />0.62 MB/s<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />15Krpm – 10 K rpm<br />Read load types<br />(1)<br />Sequential Read<br />Outer tracks<br />(2)<br />Sequential Read<br />Inner tracks<br />(3)<br />Random Read<br />Tot. Fragmented disk<br />128 KB / 8KB segments<br />(4)<br />Worst case Read<br />Tot. Fragmented disk<br />128 KB / 8KB segments<br />
    112. 112. 42<br />4/8 KB segment<br />Spindle<br />Arm<br />Arm pivot<br />Sector<br />Platters<br />Cylinder<br />Arm assembly<br />Tracks<br />Heads<br />128 KB segment<br />100+ HD’s<br />// Striping:<br /><ul><li>Large segment size-> Higher efficiency Hard Disk</li></ul>=> 10 MB/s(SCSI/FC HD)<br />(6.6MB/s for (S)ATA disk)<br />Media File<br />Media File<br />Media File<br />Media File<br /><ul><li>Fully fragmented: Random access without using any Hard Disk intelligence</li></ul>Hard Disk Model<br />
    113. 113. 43<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    114. 114. File-based Media Production
    115. 115. Media Asset Management
    116. 116. Future Internet
    117. 117. Design requirements – Facts and Figures
    118. 118. The network
    119. 119. The Hard Disc
    120. 120. The File System</li></li></ul><li>44<br />X<br />SD Media<br />Storage<br />Storage<br />Throughput<br />Architecture needs to be “tuned” for media production <br />Classical IT<br />Storage<br />Storage<br />Capacity<br />Geisha results IBC 2009<br />
    121. 121. 45<br />Essence<br />Media essence<br />Media<br />Applications<br />Media<br />Clients<br />Media Essence<br />Files<br />OSI 7 layer model<br />File<br />File System<br />Protocol<br />(FTP,NFS,SMB)<br />Data<br />network<br />File I/O Requests<br />Application Layer<br />Application Layer<br />File <br />System<br />File<br />Presentation Layer<br />Presentation Layer<br />Session Layer<br />Session Layer<br />LUN<br />I/O blocks<br />Storage<br />Network<br />Transport Layer<br />Transport Layer<br />SCSI<br />Protocol<br />Block I/O Requests<br />Network Layer<br />Network Layer<br />Data Link Layer<br />Data Link Layer<br />Storage<br />Controller<br />LUN<br />Physical Layer<br />Physical Layer<br />Physisal Disk<br />Logical<br />segments<br />Virtual connection<br />Disk<br />Network<br />SCSI<br />Protocol<br />Segment I/O Requests<br />Hard<br />Disk<br />Physical Disk<br />Physical sectors<br />Bytes<br />Layered Model for Storage Infrastructure<br />
    122. 122. 46<br />FC-client Based<br />File<br />servers<br />Clients<br />FC Network<br />Avid-Unity / Quantel / <br />SGI-CXFS /<br />Thomson GV / …<br />Video<br />Proprietaire oplossingen<br />Schaalbaarheid???<br />Media Infrastructure File System<br />
    123. 123. 47<br />FC-client Based<br />IP-client based<br />Clients<br />Clients<br />Clients<br />File<br />servers<br />Clients<br />Media IP Network<br />IBM-GPFS / SGI-CXFS /<br />HP-Lustre / ADIC-Stornext /<br />Nexsan / …<br />FC Network<br />File servers cluster<br />Parallel access<br />file system<br />Avid-Unity / Quantel / <br />SGI-CXFS /<br />Thomson GV / …<br />Video<br />SAN<br />Proprietaire oplossingen<br />Schaalbaarheid???<br />MXF-AAF video/audio file<br />Media Infrastructure File System<br />
    124. 124. 48<br />FC-client Based<br />IP-client based<br />Clients<br />Clients<br />Clients<br />File<br />servers<br />Clients<br />Media IP Network<br />IBM-GPFS / SGI-CXFS /<br />HP-Lustre / ADIC-Stornext /<br />Nexsan / …<br />FC Network<br />File servers cluster<br />GPFS (IBM)<br />(General Parallel File System)<br />Parallel access<br />file system<br />Avid-Unity / Quantel / <br />SGI-CXFS /<br />Thomson GV / …<br />Video<br /><ul><li>Storage Capacity</li></ul>SAN<br /><ul><li>Parallel Throughput</li></ul>Proprietaire oplossingen<br />Schaalbaarheid???<br /><ul><li>Scalability
    125. 125. Reliability</li></ul>MXF-AAF video/audio file<br />Media Infrastructure File System<br />
    126. 126. 49<br />3 x Pinnacle chrome<br />connected to GPFS<br />1 x AVID<br />connected to local storage<br />NLE<br />NLE<br />NLE<br />NLE<br />ARDCAP<br />Playout server<br />XP<br />2004 - Proof Of Concept - (VRT/IBM)<br />VTR<br />Admin<br />Clients<br />(XP)<br />PC clients (XP)<br />Dart/Easycut/Ardlog/…<br />SDI -><br />VTR -><br />VTR<br />File -><br />Application server<br />+ Web server<br />+DB2<br />ARDCAP<br />Ingest system<br />XP<br />1 Gbit/s<br />per client<br />SuSE<br />SuSE<br />-> SDI<br />SUPERNET II<br />Media Gb Back End<br />2x OS8800<br />10 Gbit/s<br />4x 1 Gbit/s<br />per server<br />IP<br />ARDENC<br />Transcoding system<br />4 x GPFS i-node x365 (Intel/Linux)<br />EDL Conform<br />SuSE<br />SuSE<br />4 CPU<br />2 CPU<br />2 CPU<br />2 CPU<br />Tivoli TSM+Client<br />x365 (Intel/Linux)<br />FC network<br />2x MDS9216<br />2x 200 MB/s<br />per server<br />FC<br />FC<br />4x 200 MB/s<br />per storage array<br />media-file<br />LTO-2<br />taperobot<br />72 slots<br />(14 TB)<br />FAStT 900<br />84 x 146 GB<br />RAID 5<br />FAStT 900<br />84 x 146 GB<br />RAID 5<br />GPFS Soft mirror<br />10 TB net (400 hrs)<br />
    127. 127. 50<br />Media<br />Applications<br />Essence<br />Media essence<br />Files<br />Protocol<br />Efficiency<br />Over IP network<br />File System<br />Capability<br />I/O blocks<br />FC Oversubscription<br />Flow Control<br />I/O block size vs. segment size<br />+ CPU limit Controllers<br />Logical<br />segments<br />Segment size vs.<br />Efficiency of FC-AL<br />Physical sectors<br />Disk Segment size<br />vs. Disk efficiency<br />Media Essence<br />Media<br />Clients<br />File<br />IP network<br />(SUPERNET II)<br />File I/O Requests<br />File<br />GPFS<br />File System<br />LUN<br />FC Storage<br />Network<br />Block I/O Requests<br />LUN<br />DS4500<br />Physical Disk<br />FC-AL Loops<br />DiskNetwork<br />Segment I/O Requests<br />Physical Disk<br />FC<br />Hard Disk<br />Bytes<br />Original Proof of Concept – Standard IT Systems<br />
    128. 128. 51<br />Media<br />Applications<br />Essence<br />Media essence<br />MPx3 PoC<br />Media<br />Clients<br />Files<br />Media <br />IP Network<br />IP<br />network<br />GPFS<br />File System<br />GPFS<br />I/O blocks<br />FC<br />SAN<br />DS4500<br />Standard<br />IT<br />Storage<br />System<br />Standard<br />IT<br />Storage<br />System<br />Logical<br />segments<br />FC-AL<br />Hard Disk<br />Model<br />10 MB/s<br />FC-<br />Hard Disk<br />Physical sectors<br />Original Proof of Concept – Standard IT Systems<br />Media Essence<br />Media<br />Clients<br />File<br />File System<br />Protocol<br />(FTP,NFS,SMB)<br />Data<br />network<br />Optimised<br />File I/O Requests<br />File<br />File <br />System<br />Optimised<br />LUN<br />SCSI<br />Protocol<br />Storage<br />Network<br />Optimised<br />Block I/O Requests<br />LUN<br />Storage<br />Controller<br />Physical Disk<br />SCSI<br />Protocol<br />Disk<br />Network<br />Optimised<br />Segment I/O Requests<br />Physical Disk<br />Hard<br />Disk<br />Bytes<br />
    129. 129. 17 juni 2007 – Go Live<br />
    130. 130. 53<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    131. 131. File-based Media Production
    132. 132. Media Asset Management
    133. 133. Future Internet</li></li></ul><li>54<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    134. 134. File-based Media Production
    135. 135. Media Asset Management
    136. 136. Future Internet
    137. 137. Problem Analysis
    138. 138. Metadata standards overview
    139. 139. Proof of Concepts</li></li></ul><li>55<br />Problem 1 – Digital Asset Management<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Meta<br />Data<br />Communication<br />(Information)<br />Media Asset Management<br />Production and distribution<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    140. 140. 56<br />Problem 1 - Digital AssetManagement<br />Suprastructure – Metadata Mgnt<br />Production and distribution<br />Infrastructure - Networks and Storage<br />Production Platform<br />
    141. 141. 57<br />The Solution - Media Asset Management System<br />archiefnummer : ALG 20010813 1<br />fragmentnummer : 1 <br />reeks : 1000 ZONNEN EN GARNALEN<br />bandnummer : E03024404<br />formaat : DBCM<br />fragmenttitel : 1000 ZONNEN & GARNALEN<br />beeld : KL/PALPLUS<br />fragmentduur : 18 20 <br />tekst : 0'00" TOERISTISCH REPORTAGEMAGAZINE OVERZICHT <br /> ONDERWERPEN GENERIEK TOERISTISCH REPORTAGEMAGAZINE, <br /> OVERZICHT ONDERWERPEN <br /> 0'50" VANDAAG : KUNSTENAAR LUC HOFKENS ONTWIERP EEN OASE <br /> OP ZIJN DAKTERRAS IN BORGERHOUT DIE DOET DENKEN AAN DE <br /> GRAND CANYON INTERVIEW MET LUC EN ZIJN VROUW <br /> MARILOU BUITENBEELD DAK MET OMGEVING BUITENKANT <br /> ARBEIDERSWONING, PANO OVER ROTSWANDEN, KRATEN MET WATER, <br /> BEPANTING, FOTOALBUM MET VERLOOP WERKEN <br /> 4'00" JUNIOR : KLAARTJE ALAERTS, 13 JAAR WIL ASTRONAUTEN <br /> WORDEN ZE BEZOEKT HETEUROSPACE CENTER METRUIMTEVEREN, <br /> RAKETTEN SIMULATIE IN RUIMTEVEER, INTERVIEW, HEEFT EEN <br /> UFO GEZIEN MAAKT ZELF KLEIN RAKETJE, SCHIET HET AF <br /> 7'50" DE SCHEURKALENDER : ARCHIEF RECLAMEFILM IBM <br /> INTERVIEW MAURICE DE WILDE, EERSTE PERSOONLIJKECOMPUTER <br />trefwoorden : BELGIE; BORGERHOUT; ARTIEST; OASE; KUNST; GRAND<br /> CANYON (NATUURGEBIED); DAK; TERRAS; INTERVIEW; EURO<br /> SPACE CENTER; RUIMTEVAART; PC; BOOTTOCHT; RIJKDOM; <br /> PASSAGIER; GASTRONOMIE; RESTAURANT; PERSONEEL; <br /> VAKANTIE; BINNENBEELD; SCHIP; BECKERS LEEN; VRT; <br /> LOTTO; RADIOOMROEPSTER; KLANKSTUDIO; UITVINDING; <br /> BARBECUE; BETONMOLEN; IBM; RECLAMESPOT<br />rechthebbende : VRT<br />Opzoekscherm FILM Set: 16 Aantal: 1<br />blz 1 van 3<br /> trefwoorden: ibm and vrt <br /> archiefnummer: - <br /> uitzendjaar: maand: dag: <br /> fragmentnummer: fragmentduur: <br /> reeks: <br /> formaat: bandnummer: <br /> aflevering: afleveringsnummer: <br /> programma: uitzenddatum: <br /> fragmenttitel: <br /> tekst: <br /> kategorie: <br /> opnamedatum: opnamenummer: <br /> journalist: rechthebbende: <br /> SETS <br />The strings required for the operation are not defined <br /> F11 F12 F13 F14 F17 F18 F19 F20 Ent <br />Eindigen Sets Refset Toon Vorige Volg/Leeg Thesaurus Commando Opzoeken <br />
    142. 142. Solution 2 - The SearchEngine!<br />58<br />
    143. 143. Problem 2 - System Integration<br />59<br /><ul><li>Assessements
    144. 144. Re-use of material assumes a central Media Asset Mgntsystem
    145. 145. The system is aware of the production processes
    146. 146. APIs supporting metadata standards enable smooth integration
    147. 147. A workflow engine manages overall consistency
    148. 148. Commercial Media Asset Management systems don’t match these requirements
    149. 149. Ad hoc plumbing (“best of breed”) compromises stability and quality of the product
    150. 150. The worst-case scenario is ad hoc plumbing by using an Enterprise Service Bus</li></ul>Media Asset Mgnt<br />
    151. 151. SOA – Some Overstretched Assumptions?<br />60<br />EBU Production Management Seminar 2009(!)<br /><ul><li>An SOA “has the ability to manage the complexity” (CISCO) but it usually increases it;
    152. 152. “The ESB should replace all application specific interfaces by an general purpose abstract interface”(IBM). At the contrary, it should implement some major interfaces without further custom development (NewsML-G2, TVAnytime, Mpeg7,…);
    153. 153. It is assumed that “the SOA and the ESB simplify your service portfolio” (e.g. a single video transcoder), but leads to massive overconsumption of IT infrastructure(!);</li></ul>Supply Chain Engine<br />More, better and structuredmetadataenable the evolutionfrombare system integration to information integration and supplychain optimisation.<br />
    154. 154. 61<br />Type example<br />Correspondent<br />(email)<br />Archives<br />Documentation<br />Services<br />Web Sites<br />EBU Consignment (Superpop – NMS)<br />Reuters Consignment<br />(NewsML1.1)<br />EBU popserver<br />(NMS)<br />MAM system<br />Telex Services – ‘Wires’<br />(IPTC7901)<br />Lack of effective standards <br /><ul><li>Brittle point to point integrations
    155. 155. Redundant information – Overflow
    156. 156. Lack of awareness of potentially relevant items</li></ul>News Production System<br />
    157. 157. However – the production context<br />Particular issues in Production<br /><ul><li> Multiple sources of more or less structured metadata;
    158. 158. Parallel sources cause dupplicates;
    159. 159. International context - multilingual</li></li></ul><li>63<br />
    160. 160. 64<br />Media Asset Management as a Process<br />!<br /><ul><li> Reuse - Electronic and Structured Information are essential
    161. 161. One Set of Numbers - A Media Asset Management System enables(!) information integrity
    162. 162. Metadata Standards enable(!) interoperability
    163. 163. Information integration has priority on application integration(!!!). Semantic technology will enable(!) normalisation of semi-structured information.</li></ul>An architecture based on an extensible data-model and a consistent application framework<br />(≠ Digitizing analogue and disintegrated information flows)<br />
    164. 164. Lessons Learned – Principles of System Integration<br />Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler.<br />
    165. 165. 66<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    166. 166. File-based Media Production
    167. 167. Media Asset Management
    168. 168. Future Internet
    169. 169. The Problem
    170. 170. Metadata standards overview
    171. 171. Proof of Concepts</li></li></ul><li>67<br />New Products<br />(Creativity)<br />Bill of Material<br />Sales <br />(Distribution)<br />Product Catalog<br />Supply<br />(Production)<br />Material Master <br />Enterprise Resources Planning - Logistieke metadata (APICS)<br /><ul><li>Logistieke metadatais informatie met betrekking tot de ontwikkeling, productie en distributie van het product.
    172. 172. APICS (www.apics.org) is een industrieassociatie die het logistiek vocabularium standaardiseert.
    173. 173. Implementatie - Logistieke informatie vormt de basis van een ERP systeemen wordt meestel gecommuniceerd als inhoud van een document.</li></ul>Sales and Operations Planning<br />
    174. 174. 68<br />Product Engineering - Beschrijvende metadata (CAD/CAM)<br /><ul><li>Beschrijvende metadatais informatie met betrekking tot de inhoud van het product en ze is meestal het resultaat van een productontwikkelingsproces. Indien mogelijk wordt dit proces geformaliseerd en gebruikt men hiervoor een CAD systeem.
    175. 175. Per industrie en per type product zijn er vaak verschillende methodes met bijhorende documentatiestandaarden:
    176. 176. Nieuws maakt gebruik van NewsML(www.iptc.org/newsml)
    177. 177. Movie Script Markup Language (MSML) is in ontwikkeling
    178. 178. Implementatie - In het algemeen is beschrijvende informatie beschikbaar onder de vorm van tekst of grafische modellen (aka scripts en storyboards).</li></li></ul><li>69<br />Het archief – Annoteren, indexeren, opzoeken…<br />P/META<br />Mpeg7<br />Feature<br />Extraction<br />Archive <br />System<br /><ul><li>Het archiefsysteem verzamelt alle beschikbare metadata met betrekking tot ruw materiaal of afgewerkte producten. P/META (www.ebu.ch) is origineel ontwikkeld voor deze specifieke toepassing.
    179. 179. Wanneer feature extraction algoritmes worden gebruikt om diverse visuele, aurale of conceptuele entiteiten te herkennen, maken we bij voorkeur gebruik van ISO/IEC Mpeg7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mpeg7).
    180. 180. De documentalist rubriceert en categoriseert de beschikbare items. Hij gebruikt hiervoor meestal termen uit een gecontroleerde lijst en hij kan de de facto standaard Library of Congress Subject Headings (http://authorities.loc.gov) gebruiken.</li></li></ul><li>70<br />
    181. 181. 71<br />Sales and Distribution – Electronische Programmagids (TVAnytime)<br />TV-<br />Anytime<br />P/META<br />Distribution Scheduling System<br /><ul><li>Deelektronische programmagids (EPG)is een onderdeel van het proces ‘Sales and Distribution’ en het is een combinatie van logistieke en inhoudelijke gegevens afkomstig uit het ERP systeem en het productontwikkelingsproces.
    182. 182. De EPG informatie wordt meestal gecentraliseerd in een distribution scheduling systeem, en dit publiceert op haar beurt het zendschema naar diverse platformen. We kunnen bijvoorbeeld P/META (www.ebu.ch) recupereren om deze interface te implementeren.
    183. 183. Hoewel TV-Anytime (www.tv-anytime.org, genormeerd door ETSI) beschikbaar is om uitzendschema’s te representeren, worden in de praktijk nog steeds voor elk doelplatform proprietaire interfaces ontwikkeld. </li></li></ul><li>72<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    184. 184. File-based Media Production
    185. 185. Media Asset Management
    186. 186. Future Internet
    187. 187. The Problem
    188. 188. Metadata standards overview
    189. 189. Proof of Concept</li></li></ul><li>73<br />Video Search<br />?<br /><ul><li>Search federation by system integration
    190. 190. Facetted search
    191. 191. Integrated application of keywords
    192. 192. Intuitive and structured presentation of results
    193. 193. Timestamped metadata enables direct random access to audiovisual material</li></ul>Search Client<br />(Custom Development)<br />Legacy Video Library<br />(Basisplus)<br />Raw Material<br />(EBU Superpop)<br />Media Asset Management System<br />(Ardome)<br />Search Engine<br />(Lucene/SOLR)<br />Actual news items<br />(Ardome)<br />
    194. 194. 74<br />Proof of Concept - The Search Engine<br />
    195. 195. 75<br />Shot Segmentation and Scene Recognition<br />
    196. 196. 76<br />Computer Assisted Analysis<br />
    197. 197. 77<br />Overview<br /><ul><li> Background
    198. 198. File-based Media Production
    199. 199. Media Asset Management
    200. 200. Future Internet</li></li></ul><li>A customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black.(Henry Ford)<br />
    201. 201. Business as Usual – Live Streaming<br /><ul><li>Radio-player and television software
    202. 202. Easy integration – “in series” live transcoding</li></ul>Moderate complexity – “iPlayer”<br /><ul><li>On demand complements live offering
    203. 203. Product Catalogue - Electronic Programme Guide
    204. 204. Major impact – master data power-lifting </li></ul>Future Internet…<br /><ul><li>Consistent and transient multi-platform experience
    205. 205. Seamless integration of live and on demand
    206. 206. Metadata and APIs – 3rd party content enhancement
    207. 207. …</li></ul>Non-linear Distribution<br />
    208. 208. In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they enabled Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and eventually the Renaissance. <br />In Switzerland they ‘ve had brotherly love and piece for 500 years and they’ve been able to produce…<br />
    209. 209.
    210. 210. Porting the radioplayer...<br />
    211. 211. Porting the radioplayer...<br />
    212. 212. Stats<br /><ul><li>Launch feb 2009
    213. 213. Currently over 80.000 installations
    214. 214. 3500 users per day
    215. 215. Average duration 30 min</li></li></ul><li>Production System Virtualisation<br />
    216. 216. 86<br />From « metadata » to CAD/CAM<br />?<br />
    217. 217. 87<br />Drama Production<br />
    218. 218. 88<br />Proof of Concept – Model Driven Development<br />Demo<br />
    219. 219. 89<br />http://medialab.vrt.be<br />http://www.limecraft.com<br />http://twitter.com/limecraft<br />Maarten.verwaest@limecraft.com<br />
    220. 220. 90<br />Gartner<br />

    ×