draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-21.txt 
Audio/Video Transport Working Group Q. Wu, Ed. Audio/Video Transport Working Group Q. Wu, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Internet-Draft Huawei
Intended status: Informational G. Hunt Intended status: Informational G. Hunt
Expires: March 18, 2013 Unaffiliated Expires: March 25, 2013 Unaffiliated
P. Arden P. Arden
BT BT
September 14, 2012 September 21, 2012
Guidelines for Use of the RTP Monitoring Framework Guidelines for Use of the RTP Monitoring Framework
draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20.txt draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-21.txt
Abstract Abstract
This memo proposes an extensible Real-Time Protocol (RTP) monitoring This memo proposes an extensible Real-Time Protocol (RTP) monitoring
framework for extending RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) with a new RTCP framework for extending RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) with a new RTCP
Extended Reports (XR) block type to report new metrics regarding Extended Reports (XR) block type to report new metrics regarding
media transmission or reception quality. In this framework, a new XR media transmission or reception quality. In this framework, a new XR
block should contain a single metric or a small number of metrics block should contain a single metric or a small number of metrics
relevant to a single parameter of interest or concern, rather than relevant to a single parameter of interest or concern, rather than
containing a number of metrics which attempt to provide full coverage containing a number of metrics which attempt to provide full coverage
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
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 March 18, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 25, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 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 42 skipping to change at page 2, line 42
metric blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 metric blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. An Example of a Metric Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6. An Example of a Metric Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Application To RFC 5117 Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. Application To RFC 5117 Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.1. Applicability to Translators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1. Applicability to Translators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.2. Applicability to MCU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.2. Applicability to MCU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 10. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.1. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.1. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.2. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.2. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.3. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.3. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.4. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.4. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.5. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.5. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.6. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.6. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.7. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.7. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.8. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.8. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.9. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.9. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.10. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.10. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.11. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.11. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.12. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.12. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.13. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.13. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.14. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.14. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A.15. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A.15. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A.16. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A.16. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A.17. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A.17. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A.18. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A.18. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A.19. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 A.19. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
A.20. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 A.20. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
A.21. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 A.21. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
A.22. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Multimedia services using the Real-Time Protocol (RTP) are seeing Multimedia services using the Real-Time Protocol (RTP) are seeing
increased use. Standard methods for gathering RTP performance increased use. Standard methods for gathering RTP performance
metrics from these applications are needed to manage uncertainties in metrics from these applications are needed to manage uncertainties in
the behavior and availability of their services. Standards , such as the behavior and availability of their services. Standards , such as
RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)[RFC3611] and other RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)[RFC3611] and other
RTCP extension to Sender Reports (SR), Receiver Reports (RR) RTCP extension to Sender Reports (SR), Receiver Reports (RR)
skipping to change at page 4, line 35 skipping to change at page 4, line 35
In the Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390], guidelines for In the Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390], guidelines for
Considering New Performance Metric Development are provided. The Considering New Performance Metric Development are provided. The
objective of this document is to describe an extensible RTP objective of this document is to describe an extensible RTP
monitoring framework to provide a small number of re-usable Quality monitoring framework to provide a small number of re-usable Quality
of Service (QoS) / QoE metrics which facilitate reduced of Service (QoS) / QoE metrics which facilitate reduced
implementation costs and help maximize inter-operability. The implementation costs and help maximize inter-operability. The
"Guidelines for Extending the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)" [RFC5968] "Guidelines for Extending the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)" [RFC5968]
has stated that, where RTCP is to be extended with a new metric, the has stated that, where RTCP is to be extended with a new metric, the
preferred mechanism is by the addition of a new RTCP XR [RFC3611] preferred mechanism is by the addition of a new RTCP XR [RFC3611]
block. This memo assumes that any requirement for a new metric to be block. This memo assumes that all the guidelines from RFC 5968 must
transported in RTCP will use a new RTCP XR block and all the apply on top of the guidelines in this document. In the Performance
guidelines from RFC 5968 must apply on top of the guidelines in this Metrics Framework [RFC6390], guidelines for Considering New
document. . Performance Metric Development are provided. When new performance
metrics are specified, they must follow the RFC 6390 rules:
specifically, the performance metric definition template (see section
5.4.4, RFC 6390) must be used.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
This memo is informative and as such contains no normative This memo is informative and as such contains no normative
requirements. requirements.
In addition, the following terms are defined: In addition, the following terms are defined:
Transport level metrics Transport level metrics
A set of metrics which characterise the three transport A set of metrics which characterise the three transport
impairments of packet loss, packet delay, jitter. These metrics impairments of packet loss, packet delay, jitter (also known as
should be usable by any application which uses RTP transport. delay variation). These metrics should be usable by any
application which uses RTP transport.
Application level metrics Application level metrics
Metrics relating to application specific parameters or QoE related Metrics relating to application specific parameters or QoE related
parameters. Application specific parameters are measured at the parameters. Application specific parameters are measured at the
application level and focus on quality of content rather than application level and focus on quality of content rather than
network performance. QoE related parameters reflect the end-to- network performance. QoE related parameters reflect the end-to-
end performance at the services level and are usually measured at end performance at the services level and are usually measured at
the user endpoint. One example of such metrics is the QoE Metric the user endpoint. One example of such metrics is the QoE Metric
specified in QoE metric reporting Block [QOE_BLOCK]. specified in QoE metric reporting Block [QOE_BLOCK].
skipping to change at page 5, line 40 skipping to change at page 5, line 41
Metrics relating to the way a terminal deals with transport Metrics relating to the way a terminal deals with transport
impairments affecting the incident RTP stream. These may include impairments affecting the incident RTP stream. These may include
de-jitter buffering, packet loss concealment, and the use of de-jitter buffering, packet loss concealment, and the use of
redundant streams (if any) for correction of error or loss. redundant streams (if any) for correction of error or loss.
Direct metrics Direct metrics
Metrics that can be directly measured or calculated and are not Metrics that can be directly measured or calculated and are not
dependent on other metrics. dependent on other metrics.
Composed metrics
Metrics that are not measured directly but rather are derived by
algorithmically combining one or more measured metrics [RFC6390].
An example is a metric derived based on direct metrics that have
been measured.
Interval metrics Interval metrics
Metrics measured over the course of a single reporting interval Metrics measured over the course of a single reporting interval
between two successive report blocks. This may be the most recent between two successive report blocks. This may be the most recent
RTCP reporting interval ([RFC3550], section 6.2) or some other RTCP reporting interval ([RFC3550], section 6.2) or some other
interval signalled using an RTCP Measurement Information XR Block interval signalled using an RTCP Measurement Information XR Block
[MEASI]. An example interval metric is the count of the number of [MEASI]. An example interval metric is the count of the number of
RTP packets lost over the course of the last RTCP reporting RTP packets lost over the course of the last RTCP reporting
interval. interval.
skipping to change at page 7, line 51 skipping to change at page 7, line 51
can be a passive monitor that sees the RTP/RTCP stream pass it, or a can be a passive monitor that sees the RTP/RTCP stream pass it, or a
system that gets sent RTCP reports but not RTP and uses that to system that gets sent RTCP reports but not RTP and uses that to
collect information. The third party monitor should be placed on the collect information. The third party monitor should be placed on the
RTP/RTCP path between the sender, intermediate and the receiver. RTP/RTCP path between the sender, intermediate and the receiver.
The RTP Metric Block (MB) conveys real time Application QoS/QoE The RTP Metric Block (MB) conveys real time Application QoS/QoE
metric information and is used by the monitor to exchange with other metric information and is used by the monitor to exchange with other
monitors in the appropriate report block format. The information monitors in the appropriate report block format. The information
contained in the RTP MBs is collected by monitors and can be contained in the RTP MBs is collected by monitors and can be
formulated as various types of metrics, e.g., direct metrics/composed formulated as various types of metrics, e.g., direct metrics/composed
metrics or interval metrics/ cumulative metrics/sampled metrics, etc. performance metrics [RFC6390]or interval metrics/ cumulative metrics/
Both the RTCP or RTCP XR can be extended to transport these metrics, sampled metrics, etc. Both the RTCP or RTCP XR can be extended to
e.g., the basic RTCP Reception Report (RR) [RFC3550] that conveys transport these metrics, e.g., the basic RTCP Reception Report (RR)
reception statistics (i.e., transport level statistics) for multiple [RFC3550] that conveys reception statistics (i.e., transport level
RTP media streams, the RTCP XRs [RFC3611] that supplement the statistics) for multiple RTP media streams, the RTCP XRs [RFC3611]
existing RTCP packets and provide more detailed feedback on reception that supplement the existing RTCP packets and provide more detailed
quality, and RTCP NACK [RFC4585] that provides feedback on the RTP feedback on reception quality, and RTCP NACK [RFC4585] that provides
sequence numbers for a subset of the lost packets or all the feedback on the RTP sequence numbers for a subset of the lost packets
currently lost packets. Ultimately the metric information collected or all the currently lost packets. Ultimately the metric information
by monitors within the RTP monitoring framework may go to the network collected by monitors within the RTP monitoring framework may go to
management tools beyond the RTP monitoring framework, e.g., as shown the network management tools beyond the RTP monitoring framework,
Figure 1, the monitors may export the metric information derived from e.g., as shown Figure 1, the monitors may export the metric
the RTP monitoring framework to the management system using non-RTP information derived from the RTP monitoring framework to the
means. management system using non-RTP means.
+-----------+ +----------+ +-----------+ +----------+
|Third Party| |Management| |Third Party| |Management|
| Monitor | >>>>>>>>| System |<<<<< | Monitor | >>>>>>>>| System |<<<<<
+-----------+ ^ +----------+ ^ +-----------+ ^ +----------+ ^
: ^ ^ ^ : ^ ^ ^
: | ^ ^ : | ^ ^
+---------------+ : | +-------------+ +-------------+ +---------------+ : | +-------------+ +-------------+
| +-----------+ | : | |+-----------+| |+-----------+| | +-----------+ | : | |+-----------+| |+-----------+|
| | Monitor | |..:...|.......|| Monitor ||........|| Monitor || | | Monitor | |..:...|.......|| Monitor ||........|| Monitor ||
skipping to change at page 23, line 10 skipping to change at page 23, line 10
Performance Metric Development", RFC 6390, October 2011. Performance Metric Development", RFC 6390, October 2011.
[Y1540] ITU-T, "ITU-T Rec. Y.1540, IP packet transfer and [Y1540] ITU-T, "ITU-T Rec. Y.1540, IP packet transfer and
availability performance parameters", November 2007. availability performance parameters", November 2007.
Appendix A. Change Log Appendix A. Change Log
Note to the RFC-Editor: please remove this section prior to Note to the RFC-Editor: please remove this section prior to
publication as an RFC. publication as an RFC.
A.1. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20 A.1. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-21
The following are the major changes compared to 20:
o Editorial changes based on Benoit's Review.
A.2. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-20
The following are the major changes compared to 19: The following are the major changes compared to 19:
o Editorial changes based on IESG Review. o Editorial changes based on IESG Review.
o Some new text in the security section to clarify encryption issue o Some new text in the security section to clarify encryption issue
for third party monitoring. for third party monitoring.
o Some new text in introduction section to clarify the relationship o Some new text in introduction section to clarify the relationship
with RFC5968 and RFC6390. with RFC5968 and RFC6390.
A.2. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-19 A.3. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-19
The following are the major changes compared to 18: The following are the major changes compared to 18:
o Editorial changes based on Meral Shirazipour's second Gen-Art o Editorial changes based on Meral Shirazipour's second Gen-Art
review. review.
o Transport level metrics definition simplifying based on Robert's o Transport level metrics definition simplifying based on Robert's
comment. comment.
A.3. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-18 A.4. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-18
The following are the major changes compared to 17: The following are the major changes compared to 17:
o Some Editorial changes based on Gen-Art review and Secdir Review. o Some Editorial changes based on Gen-Art review and Secdir Review.
A.4. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-17 A.5. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-17
The following are the major changes compared to 16: The following are the major changes compared to 16:
o Some Editorial changes. o Some Editorial changes.
A.5. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-16 A.6. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-16
The following are the major changes compared to 15: The following are the major changes compared to 15:
o A few modification to the figure 1. o A few modification to the figure 1.
o Change RTCP XR reports into RTCP reports in the section 3.1. o Change RTCP XR reports into RTCP reports in the section 3.1.
o References Update. o References Update.
A.6. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-15 A.7. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-15
The following are the major changes compared to 14: The following are the major changes compared to 14:
o Add figure 1 in section 3 to describe RTP monitoring framework. o Add figure 1 in section 3 to describe RTP monitoring framework.
o Change the title as Guidelines for Use of the RTP Monitoring o Change the title as Guidelines for Use of the RTP Monitoring
Framework. Framework.
o Other editorial change to get in line with the title change in the o Other editorial change to get in line with the title change in the
section 3. section 3.
A.7. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-14 A.8. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-14
The following are the major changes compared to 13: The following are the major changes compared to 13:
o Incorporate the key points in the section 3.2 into overview o Incorporate the key points in the section 3.2 into overview
section. section.
o Remove the figure 1 and use the description instead. o Remove the figure 1 and use the description instead.
o Add description in the section 3.3 to discuss the possible o Add description in the section 3.3 to discuss the possible
location of the monitors and the types of metric at that location. location of the monitors and the types of metric at that location.
o Add the description to make the definition of Interval metrics/ o Add the description to make the definition of Interval metrics/
cumulative metrics/sampled metrics clear. cumulative metrics/sampled metrics clear.
o Editorial Changes. o Editorial Changes.
A.8. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-13 A.9. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-13
The following are the major changes compared to 12: The following are the major changes compared to 12:
o Editorial Changes. o Editorial Changes.
A.9. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12 A.10. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12
The following are the major changes compared to 11: The following are the major changes compared to 11:
o Editorial Changes based on Charles' Comments. o Editorial Changes based on Charles' Comments.
o Reference update. o Reference update.
o Add one new section 5.2 to discuss Correlating RTCP XR with RTP o Add one new section 5.2 to discuss Correlating RTCP XR with RTP
data. data.
o Add text in section 5.1 to highlight it is more appropriate to o Add text in section 5.1 to highlight it is more appropriate to
define each block in a separate draft. define each block in a separate draft.
A.10. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-11 A.11. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-11
The following are the major changes compared to 10: The following are the major changes compared to 10:
o Editorial Changes. o Editorial Changes.
A.11. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-10 A.12. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-10
The following are the major changes compared to 09: The following are the major changes compared to 09:
o Discuss what exist already for monitoring in section 3.1. o Discuss what exist already for monitoring in section 3.1.
o Provide benefit using RTCP XR based monitoring in section 3.1. o Provide benefit using RTCP XR based monitoring in section 3.1.
o add one new paragraph in section 3.1 to describe how monitoring o add one new paragraph in section 3.1 to describe how monitoring
architecture is applied to ASM/SSM. architecture is applied to ASM/SSM.
o Other Editorial Changes. o Other Editorial Changes.
A.12. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-09 A.13. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-09
The following are the major changes compared to 07: The following are the major changes compared to 07:
o Rephrase application level metric definition. o Rephrase application level metric definition.
o Add one new section to clarify where to measure QoE related o Add one new section to clarify where to measure QoE related
parameters. parameters.
o Add text in section 5.3 to clarify the failure case when o Add text in section 5.3 to clarify the failure case when
measurement interval is not sent. measurement interval is not sent.
o Add text in section 5.3 to clarify how to deal with multiple o Add text in section 5.3 to clarify how to deal with multiple
measurements information blocks carried in the same packet. measurements information blocks carried in the same packet.
A.13. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-08 A.14. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-08
The following are the major changes compared to 07: The following are the major changes compared to 07:
o Editorial change to the reference. o Editorial change to the reference.
A.14. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-07 A.15. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-07
The following are the major changes compared to 06: The following are the major changes compared to 06:
o Clarify the XR block code points consumption issue in the section o Clarify the XR block code points consumption issue in the section
4 and new section 5.4. 4 and new section 5.4.
o Other editorial changes. o Other editorial changes.
A.15. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-06 A.16. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-06
The following are the major changes compared to 05: The following are the major changes compared to 05:
o Some editorial changes. o Some editorial changes.
A.16. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-05 A.17. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-05
The following are the major changes compared to 04: The following are the major changes compared to 04:
o Replace "chunk" with "new SDES item". o Replace "chunk" with "new SDES item".
o Add texts in security section to discussion potential security o Add texts in security section to discussion potential security
issues. issues.
o Add new sub-section 5.3 to discuss Reducing Measurement o Add new sub-section 5.3 to discuss Reducing Measurement
information repetition. information repetition.
o Other editorial changes. o Other editorial changes.
A.17. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04 A.18. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04
The following are the major changes compared to 03: The following are the major changes compared to 03:
o Update section 5.2 to clarify using SDES packet to carry o Update section 5.2 to clarify using SDES packet to carry
correlation information. correlation information.
o Remove section 5.3 since additional identity information goes to o Remove section 5.3 since additional identity information goes to
SDES packet and using SSRC to identify each block is standard RTP SDES packet and using SSRC to identify each block is standard RTP
feature. feature.
o Swap the last two paragraphs in the section 4 since identity o Swap the last two paragraphs in the section 4 since identity
information duplication can not been 100% avoided. information duplication can not been 100% avoided.
o Other editorial changes. o Other editorial changes.
A.18. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-03 A.19. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-03
The following are the major changes compared to 02: The following are the major changes compared to 02:
o Update bullet 2 in section 4 to explain the ill-effect of Identity o Update bullet 2 in section 4 to explain the ill-effect of Identity
Information duplication. Information duplication.
o Update bullet 3 in section 4 to explain why Correlating RTCP XR o Update bullet 3 in section 4 to explain why Correlating RTCP XR
with the non-RTP data is needed. with the non-RTP data is needed.
o Update section 5.2 to focus on how to reduce the identity o Update section 5.2 to focus on how to reduce the identity
information repetition information repetition
o Update section 5.3 to explain how to correlate identity o Update section 5.3 to explain how to correlate identity
information with the non-RTP data information with the non-RTP data
A.19. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-02 A.20. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-02
The following are the major changes compared to 01: The following are the major changes compared to 01:
o Deleting first paragraph of Section 1. o Deleting first paragraph of Section 1.
o Deleting Section 3.1, since the interaction with the management o Deleting Section 3.1, since the interaction with the management
application is out of scope of this draft. application is out of scope of this draft.
o Separate identity information correlation from section 5.2 as new o Separate identity information correlation from section 5.2 as new
section 5.3. section 5.3.
o Remove figure 2 and related text from section 5.2. o Remove figure 2 and related text from section 5.2.
o Editorial changes in the section 4 and the first paragraph of o Editorial changes in the section 4 and the first paragraph of
section 7. section 7.
A.20. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-01 A.21. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-01
The following are the major changes compared to 00: The following are the major changes compared to 00:
o Restructure the document by merging section 4 into section 3. o Restructure the document by merging section 4 into section 3.
o Remove section 4.1,section 5 that is out of scope of this o Remove section 4.1,section 5 that is out of scope of this
document. document.
o Remove the last bullet in section 6 and section 7.3 based on o Remove the last bullet in section 6 and section 7.3 based on
conclusion of last meeting. conclusion of last meeting.
skipping to change at page 28, line 5 skipping to change at page 28, line 15
o Update figure 1 and related text in section 3 according to the o Update figure 1 and related text in section 3 according to the
monitor definition in RFC3550. monitor definition in RFC3550.
o Revise section 9 to address monitor declaration issue. o Revise section 9 to address monitor declaration issue.
o Merge the first two bullet in section 6. o Merge the first two bullet in section 6.
o Add one new bullet to discuss metric block association in section o Add one new bullet to discuss metric block association in section
6. 6.
A.21. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00 A.22. draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00
The following are the major changes compared to The following are the major changes compared to
draft-hunt-avtcore-monarch-02: draft-hunt-avtcore-monarch-02:
o Move Geoff Hunt and Philip Arden to acknowledgement section. o Move Geoff Hunt and Philip Arden to acknowledgement section.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Qin Wu (editor) Qin Wu (editor)
Huawei Huawei
 End of changes. 30 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 77 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/