Audio/Video Transport Working Group | G. Hunt |
Internet-Draft | Unaffiliated |
Intended status: Standards Track | A. Clark |
Expires: February 23, 2013 | Telchemy |
Q. Wu | |
Huawei | |
August 24, 2012 |
RTCP XR Report Block for Packet Delay Variation Metric Reporting
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv-04.txt
This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block that allows the reporting of Packet Delay Variation metrics for a range of RTP applications.
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 February 23, 2013.
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 in a range of RTP applications.
The new block type provides information on Packet Delay Variation using one of several standard metrics.
The metrics belong to the class of transport metrics defined in [MONARCH] .
The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550]. [RFC3611] defined an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended Report (XR). This draft defines a new Extended Report block that must be used in accordance with [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].
The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the definition and specification of performance metrics. The RTP Monitoring Architectures [MONARCH] provides guideline for reporting block format using RTCP XR. The XR Block described in this document are in accordance with the guidelines in [RFC6390] and [MONARCH].
These metrics are applicable to a wide range of RTP applications in which the application streams are sensitive to delay variation [RFC5481].
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].
This report block makes use of binary fractions. The terminology used is
Metrics in this block report on packet delay variation in the stream arriving at the RTP system. Instances of this Metrics Block refer by Synchronization source (SSRC) to the separate auxiliary Measurement Information block [MEASI] which contains measurement intervals. This metric block relies on the measurement interval in the Measurement Information block indicating the span of the report and SHOULD be sent in the same compound RTCP packet as the measurement information block. If the measurement interval is not received for this metric block, this metric block SHOULD be discarded.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | BT=NPDV | I |pdvtyp |Rsv| block length=3 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SSRC of Source | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Pos PDV Threshold/Peak | Pos PDV Percentile | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Neg PDV Threshold/Peak | Neg PDV Percentile | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mean PDV | unused | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
PDV metrics block
This subsection provides informative guidance on when it might be appropriate to use each of the PDV metric types.
MAPDV2 (Clause 6.2.3.2 of [G.1020]) is the envelope of instantaneous (per-packet) delay when compared to the short term moving average delay. This metric could be useful in determining residual impairment when an RTP end system uses an adaptive de-jitter buffer which tracks the average delay variation, provided the adaptive de-jitter buffer have similar averaging behaviour as the MAPDV2 algorithm.
2-point PDV (Clause 6.2.4 of [Y.1540]) reports absolute packet delay variation with respect to a defined reference packet transfer delay . Note that the reference packet is generally selected as the packet with minimum delay based on the most common criterion (See section 1 and section 5.1 of [RFC5481] ). In an RTP context, the two "points" are at the sender (the synchronization source which applies RTP timestamps) and at the receiver. The value of this metric for the packet with index j is identical to the quantity D(i,j) defined in Section 6.4.1 of [RFC3550] and the packet index i should be set equal to the index of the reference packet for the metric in practice. The metric includes the effect of the frequency offsets of clocks in both the sender and receiver end systems, so it is useful mainly in network where synchronisation is distributed. As well as measuring packet delay variation in such networks, it may be used to ensure that synchronisation is effective, for example where the network carries ISDN data traffic over RTP [RFC4040]. The metric is likely to be useful in networks which use fixed de-jitter buffering, because it may be used to determine the length of the required de-jitter buffer, or to determine if network performance has deteriorated such that existing de-jitter buffers are too small to accommodate the observed delay variation.
[RFC3611] defines the use of SDP (Session Description Protocol) [RFC4566] for signaling the use of XR blocks. XR blocks MAY be used without prior signaling.
rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=" "rtcp-xr" ":" [xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF (defined in [RFC3611]) xr-format =/ xr-pdv-block xr-pdv-block = "pkt-dly-var" [ "," pdvtype ] [ "," nspec "," pspec ] pdvtype = "pdv=" "0" ; MAPDV2 ITU-T G.1020 / "1" ; 2-point PDV ITU-T Y.1540 / 1*2DIGIT ;Value 2~15 are valid and ;reserved for future use nspec = "nthr=" fixpoint ; negative PDV threshold (ms) / "npc=" fixpoint ; negative PDV percentile pspec = "pthr=" fixpoint ; positive PDV threshold (ms) / "ppc=" fixpoint ; positive PDV percentile fixpoint = 1*DIGIT "." 1*DIGIT ; fixed point decimal DIGIT = %x30-39
This section augments the SDP [RFC4566] attribute "rtcp-xr" defined in [RFC3611] by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to signal the use of the report block defined in this document.
When SDP is used in offer-answer, a system sending SDP may request a specific type of PDV measurement. In addition, they may state a specific percentile or threshold value, and expect to receive the corresponding threshold or percentile metric, respectively. The system receiving the SDP SHOULD send the PDV metrics requested, but if the metric is not available, the system receiving the SDP MUST send the metric block with the flag value indicating that the metric is unavailable.
New block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. For general guidelines on IANA considerations for RTCP XR, refer to [RFC3611].
This document assigns the block type value NPDV in the IANA "RTCP XR Block Type Registry" to the "Packet Delay Variation Metrics Block".
[Note to RFC Editor: please replace NPDV with the IANA provided RTCP XR block type for this block.]
This document also registers a new parameter "pkt-dly-var" in the "RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry".
The contact information for the registrations is: Qin Wu (sunseawq@huawei.com) 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 China
This document creates a new registry to be called "RTCP XR PDV block - PDV type" as a sub-registry of the "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR) Block Type Registry". Policies for this new registry are as follows:
It is believed that this proposed RTCP XR report block introduces no new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611]. This block does not provide per-packet statistics so the risk to confidentiality documented in Section 7, paragraph 3 of [RFC3611] does not apply.
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", March 1997. |
[G.1020] | , , "ITU-T Rec. G.1020, Performance parameter definitions for quality of speech and other voiceband applications utilizing IP networks", July 2006. |
[RFC3611] | Friedman, T., Caceres, R. and A. Clark, "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", November 2003. |
[RFC4566] | Handley, M., Jacobson, V. and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", July 2006. |
[RFC3550] | Schulzrinne, H., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003. |
[RFC4040] | Kreuter, R., "RTP Payload Format for a 64 kbit/s Transparent Call", April 2005. |
[RFC5226] |
Narten, T., "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", May 2008. BCP 26 |
[Y.1540] | , , "ITU-T Rec. Y.1540, IP packet transfer and availability performance parameters", November 2007. |
[MONARCH] | Hunt, G., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP", ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-13, May 2012. |
[MEASI] | Hunt, G., "Measurement Identity and information Reporting using SDES item and XR Block", ID draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-meas-identity-06, April 2012. |
[RFC6390] | Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric Development", RFC 6390, October 2011. |
[RFC5481] | Morton, A. and B. Claise, "Packet Delay Variation Applicability Statement", RFC 5481, March 2009. |
Note to the RFC-Editor: please remove this section prior to publication as an RFC.
The following are the major changes to previous version draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv-02:
The following are the major changes to previous version draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv-01:
The following are the major changes to previous version draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv-00:
The following are the major changes to previous version draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-pdv-03:
The following are the major changes to previous version :