Network Working Group | R. Huang |
Internet-Draft | Q. Wu |
Intended status: Standards Track | Huawei |
Expires: August 15, 2012 | H. Asaeda |
Keio University | |
G. Zorn, Ed. | |
Network Zen | |
February 14, 2012 |
RTCP XR Report Block for TS Decodability Statistics Metric Reporting
draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-02
Transport Stream is a standard container format used in the transmission and storage of multimedia data. This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block that allows the reporting of decodability statistics metrics related to transmissions in Transport Stream format.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 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 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 15, 2012.
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
This draft defines a new block type to augment those defined in [RFC3611] for use with Transport Stream (TS) [ISO-IEC.13818-1.2007]. The new block type supports reporting on the consistency of transport streams [ETSI] by checking TS header information. This new block type can be useful for identifying the existence, and characterizing the severity, of a packet transport problem which may affect users' perception of a service delivered over RTP; it may also be useful for verifying the continued correct operation of an existing system management and providing accurate measures of TS quality for operators.
The new report block is in compliance with the monitoring architecture specified in [RFC6390]. The metric is applicable to any type of RTP application that uses the TS standard format for transmission and storage of multimedia data.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
In addition, the following terms are defined:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | BT=TBD | rvd | block length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SSRC of source | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | begin_seq | end_seq | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Number of TSs | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Transport Stream Synchronization Losses | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Sync byte errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Continuity count errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Transport errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | PCR errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | PCR repetition errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | PCR discontinuity indicator errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | PTS errors | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This block reports decodability statistics metrics beyond the information carried in the standard RTCP packet format. Information is recorded about basic monitoring parameters necessary to ensure that the TS can be decoded including the number of Transport Stream Synchronization Losses, Sync byte errors, Continuity count errors, and continuous monitoring parameters including Transport errors, Program Clock Reference (PCR) errors, PCR repetition errors, PCR discontinuity indicator errors, and Presentation Time Stamp (PTS) errors [ETSI]. Such information can be useful for network management and real time application quality monitoring.
Note that this metric report block is not only applicable to MPEG-2 transport streams [RFC2250], but is also applicable to any other codec data encoded using the TS format.
The Decodability Metrics Block has the following format:
rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=rtcp-xr:" [xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF xr-format = decodability-metrics decodability-metrics = "decodability-metrics"
One new parameter is defined for the report block defined in this document to be used with Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] using the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]. It has the following syntax within the "rtcp-xr" attribute [RFC3611]: RFC 3611 [RFC3611] for a detailed description and the full syntax of the "rtcp-xr" attribute.
Rachel Huang rachel.huang@huawei.com 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District Nanjing, JiangSu 210012 China
New report block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. For general guidelines on IANA allocations for RTCP XR, refer to Section 6.2 of [RFC3611].
This document assigns one new block type value in the RTCP XR Block Type Registry: [RFC4566] parameter for the "rtcp-xr" attribute in the RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry:
The contact information for the registrations is:
This document also registers one SDP
This proposed RTCP XR report block introduces no new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611].
[RFC6390] | Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Guidelines for Considering New Performance Metric Development", BCP 170, RFC 6390, October 2011. |