draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-02.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-03.txt 
avtcore T.B. Terriberry avtcore T.B. Terriberry
Internet-Draft Mozilla Corporation Internet-Draft Mozilla Corporation
Updates: 3551 (if approved) April 10, 2013 Updates: 3551 (if approved) July 02, 2013
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: October 12, 2013 Expires: January 03, 2014
Update to Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Update to Remove DVI4 from the Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile
Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP) for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP)
draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-02 draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-03
Abstract Abstract
The RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control The RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control
(RTP/AVP) is the basis for many other profiles, such as the Secure (RTP/AVP) is the basis for many other profiles, such as the Secure
Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP/SAVP), the Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP/SAVP), the Extended RTP Profile for
Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/ Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/
AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based Feedback AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based Feedback
(RTP/SAVPF). This document updates the RTP/AVP profile (and by (RTP/SAVPF). This document updates RFC 3551, the RTP/AVP profile
extension, the profiles that build upon it) to reflect changes in (and by extension, the profiles that build upon it) to reflect
audio codec usage since the document was originally published. 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 October 12, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 03, 2014.
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 15 skipping to change at page 2, line 16
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC3551] says that audio applications operating under the RTP/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 there is
utility is limited in the presence of much more modern codecs. This little reason to use it when much more modern codecs are available.
document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the RTP/ This document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the
AVP profile to remove the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this also RTP/AVP profile to remove the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this
updates the profiles which build on RTP/AVP, including RTP/SAVP also updates the profiles which build on RTP/AVP, including RTP/SAVP
[RFC3711], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], and RTP/SAVPF [RFC5124]. [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 following 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. in Section 3.1.
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum, Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a
be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4). minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and
This allows interoperability without format negotiation and ensures 5 (DVI4). This allows interoperability without format negotiation
successful negotiation with a conference control protocol. and ensures successful negotiation with a conference control
protocol.
3.1. Updates to Section 6 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 REQUIRE sentence to this paragraph that states, "Some environments
support for PCMU." This results in the following paragraph: necessitate support for PCMU." This results in the following
paragraph:
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum, Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a
be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU). This allows minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU).
interoperability without format negotiation and ensures successful This allows interoperability without format negotiation and
negotiation with a conference control protocol. Some environments ensures successful negotiation with a conference control protocol.
REQUIRE support for PCMU. Some environments necessitate 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. 11 change blocks. 
26 lines changed or deleted 30 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/