draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-03.txt   rfc7007.txt 
avtcore T.B. Terriberry Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) T. Terriberry
Internet-Draft Mozilla Corporation Request for Comments: 7007 Mozilla Corporation
Updates: 3551 (if approved) July 02, 2013 Updates: 3551 August 2013
Intended status: Standards Track Category: Standards Track
Expires: January 03, 2014 ISSN: 2070-1721
Update to Remove DVI4 from the Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile Update to Remove DVI4 from the Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile
for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP) for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP)
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
AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based
(RTP/SAVPF). This document updates RFC 3551, the RTP/AVP profile Feedback (RTP/SAVPF). This document updates RFC 3551, the RTP/AVP
(and by extension, the profiles that build upon it) to reflect profile (and by extension, the profiles that build upon it), to
changes in audio codec usage since the document was originally reflect changes in audio codec usage since that document was
published. originally published.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 03, 2014. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7007.
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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
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 .............................................3
3.1. Updates to Section 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Updates to Section 6 of RFC 3551 ...........................3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations .........................................3
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5. Acknowledgments .................................................3
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6. References ......................................................4
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6.1. Normative References .......................................4
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6.2. Informative References .....................................4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
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 there is in practice, many RTP deployments do not support DVI4, and there is
little reason to use it when much more modern codecs are available. little reason to use it when much more modern codecs are available.
This document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the This document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the
RTP/AVP profile to remove the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this RTP/AVP profile and removes the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this
also updates the profiles which build on RTP/AVP, including RTP/SAVP also updates the profiles that 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 in
in Section 3.1. Section 3.1:
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a
minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU)
5 (DVI4). This allows interoperability without format negotiation and 5 (DVI4). This allows interoperability without format
and ensures successful negotiation with a conference control negotiation and ensures successful negotiation with a conference
protocol. control protocol.
3.1. Updates to Section 6 3.1. Updates to Section 6 of RFC 3551
In the final paragraph of Section 6, replace, "payload types 0 (PCMU) This document updates the final paragraph of Section 6 of RFC 3551 by
and 5 (DVI4)," with "payload type 0 (PCMU)." Also, add a final replacing "payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4)" with "payload
sentence to this paragraph that states, "Some environments type 0 (PCMU)". We also add a final sentence to that paragraph that
necessitate support for PCMU." This results in the following states, "Some environments necessitate support for PCMU". This
paragraph: results in the following paragraph:
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a
minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU). minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU).
This allows interoperability without format negotiation and This allows interoperability without format negotiation and
ensures successful negotiation with a conference control protocol. ensures successful negotiation with a conference control protocol.
Some environments necessitate 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. Acknowledgments
This document has no actions for IANA.
6. Acknowledgments
Thanks to Colin Perkins for suggesting this update. Thanks to Colin Perkins for suggesting this update.
7. References 6. References
7.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and [RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551, Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
July 2003. July 2003.
7.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. [RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, March 2004. RFC 3711, March 2004.
[RFC4585] Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey, [RFC4585] Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey,
"Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control "Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, July Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, July
2006. 2006.
skipping to change at page 4, line 18 skipping to change at page 4, line 40
Author's Address Author's Address
Timothy B. Terriberry Timothy B. Terriberry
Mozilla Corporation Mozilla Corporation
650 Castro Street 650 Castro Street
Mountain View, CA 94041 Mountain View, CA 94041
USA USA
Phone: +1 650 903-0800 Phone: +1 650 903-0800
Email: tterribe@xiph.org EMail: tterribe@xiph.org
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
57 lines changed or deleted 47 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/