draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-01.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-02.txt 
avtcore T.B. Terriberry avtcore T.B. Terriberry
Internet-Draft Mozilla Corporation Internet-Draft Mozilla Corporation
Updates: 3551 (if approved) March 12, 2013 Updates: 3551 (if approved) April 10, 2013
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: September 13, 2013 Expires: October 12, 2013
Update to Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Update to Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile for Audio and Video
Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP) Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP)
draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-01 draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-02
Abstract Abstract
[RFC3551] defines the AVP RTP profile, which is the basis for many The RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control
other profiles, such as SAVP [RFC3711], AVPF [RFC4585], and SAVPF (RTP/AVP) is the basis for many other profiles, such as the Secure
[RFC5124]. This document updates [RFC3551] (and by extension, the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP/SAVP), the Extended RTP Profile for
profiles that build upon it) to reflect changes in audio codec usage Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/
since the document was originally published. AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based Feedback
(RTP/SAVPF). This document updates the RTP/AVP profile (and by
extension, the profiles that build upon it) to reflect changes in
audio codec usage since the document was originally published.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 13, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 12, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 13 skipping to change at page 2, line 16
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Updates to RFC 3551 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. Updates to RFC 3551 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1. Updates to Section 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.1. Updates to Section 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC3551] says that audio applications operating under the AVP [RFC3551] says that audio applications operating under the RTP/AVP
profile SHOULD be able to send and receive PCMU and DVI4. However, profile SHOULD be able to send and receive PCMU and DVI4. However,
in practice, many RTP deployments do not support DVI4, and its in practice, many RTP deployments do not support DVI4, and its
utility is limited in the presence of much more modern codecs. This utility is limited in the presence of much more modern codecs. This
document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the AVP document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the RTP/
profile to remove the SHOULD for DVI4. AVP profile to remove the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this also
updates the profiles which build on RTP/AVP, including RTP/SAVP
[RFC3711], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], and RTP/SAVPF [RFC5124].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Updates to RFC 3551 3. Updates to RFC 3551
The text of [RFC3551] is hereby updated as set forth below. The following text of [RFC3551] is hereby updated as set forth below
in Section 3.1.
3.1. Updates to Section 6 Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum,
be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4).
This allows interoperability without format negotiation and ensures
successful negotiation with a conference control protocol.
3.1. Updates to Section 6
In the final paragraph of Section 6, replace, "payload types 0 (PCMU) In the final paragraph of Section 6, replace, "payload types 0 (PCMU)
and 5 (DVI4)," with "payload type 0 (PCMU)." Also, add a final and 5 (DVI4)," with "payload type 0 (PCMU)." Also, add a final
sentence to this paragraph that states, "Some environments MAY make sentence to this paragraph that states, "Some environments REQUIRE
support for PCMU mandatory." support for PCMU." This results in the following paragraph:
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum,
be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU). This allows
interoperability without format negotiation and ensures successful
negotiation with a conference control protocol. Some environments
REQUIRE support for PCMU.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce any new security considerations for This document does not introduce any new security considerations for
[RFC3551]. [RFC3551].
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA. This document has no actions for IANA.
 End of changes. 13 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 34 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/