[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: (draft-wenger-avt-rtp-svc) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 RFC 6190

Audio/Video Transport WG                                      S. Wenger
Internet Draft                                               Y.-K. Wang
Intended status: Standards track                                  Nokia
Expires: December 2008                                       T. Schierl
                                                         Fraunhofer HHI
                                                       A. Eleftheriadis
                                                                  Vidyo
                                                          June 17, 2008




                     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video
                       draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-11.txt




Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 17, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).





Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


Abstract

   This memo describes an RTP payload format for scalable video coding
   (SVC) defined in_Annex G of the ITU-T Recommendation H.264 video
   codec which is technically identical to Amendment 3 of ISO/IEC
   International Standard 14496-10.  The RTP payload format allows for
   packetization of one or more Network Abstraction Layer (NAL) units,
   produced by the video encoder, in each RTP packet payload.  The
   payload format has wide applicability, such as low bit-rate
   conversational, Internet video streaming, or high bit-rate
   entertainment quality video.



Table of Contents


   Status of this Memo...............................................1
   Copyright Notice..................................................1
   Abstract..........................................................2
   Table of Contents.................................................2
   1. Introduction...................................................4
   2. Conventions....................................................4
   3. The SVC Codec..................................................4
      3.1. Overview..................................................4
      3.2. Parameter Set Concept.....................................7
      3.3. Network Abstraction Layer Unit Header.....................7
   4. Scope.........................................................11
   5. Definitions and Abbreviations.................................13
      5.1. Definitions..............................................13
         5.1.1. Definitions Per SVC Specification...................13
         5.1.2. Definitions Local to This Memo......................15
      5.2. Abbreviations............................................18
   6. RTP Payload Format............................................18
      6.1. Design Principles........................................18
      6.2. RTP Header Usage.........................................18
      6.3. Common Structure of the RTP Payload Format...............18
      6.4. NAL Unit Header Usage....................................19
      6.5. Packetization Modes......................................20
         6.5.1. Packetization Modes for Session Multiplexing........20
      6.6. Decoding Order Number (DON)..............................23
         6.6.1. Cross-Session DON (CS-DON) for Session Multiplexing.23
      6.7. Aggregation Packets......................................25
      6.8. Fragmentation Units (FUs)................................25
      6.9. Payload Content Scalability Information (PACSI) NAL Unit.25
      6.10. Non-Interleaved Multi-Time Aggregation Packets (NI-MTAPs)32
   7. Packetization Rules...........................................34


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      7.1. Packetization Rules for Session Multiplexing.............35
         7.1.1. NI-T / NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization rules.35
         7.1.2. NI-C / NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode
         rules......................................................36
         7.1.3. I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode rules...37
         7.1.4. Packetization rules for non-VCL NAL units...........38
         7.1.5. Packetization rules for Prefix NAL units............38
   8. De-Packetization Process......................................38
      8.1. De-Packetization Process for Session Multiplexing........39
         8.1.1. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-T and NI-TC Modes39
            8.1.1.1. Informative Algorithm for NI-T Decoding Order
            Recovery within an Access Unit..........................42
         8.1.2. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-C, NI-TC and I-C
         Modes......................................................45
   9. Payload Format Parameters.....................................47
      9.1. Media Type Registration..................................48
      9.2. SDP Parameters...........................................58
         9.2.1. Mapping of Payload Type Parameters to SDP...........58
         9.2.2. Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model...............59
         9.2.3. Usage with Session Multiplexing.....................64
         9.2.4. Usage in Declarative Session Descriptions...........64
      9.3. Examples.................................................65
         9.3.1. Example for Offering A Single SVC Session...........65
         9.3.2. Example for Offering Session Multiplexing...........65
      9.4. Parameter Set Considerations.............................66
   10. Security Considerations......................................66
   11. Congestion Control...........................................67
   12. IANA Consideration...........................................68
   13. Informative Appendix: Application Examples...................68
      13.1. Introduction............................................68
      13.2. Layered Multicast.......................................69
      13.3. Streaming of an SVC Scalable Stream.....................69
      13.4. Multicast to MANE, SVC Scalable Stream to Endpoint......70
      13.5. Scenarios Currently Not Considered......................71
      13.6. SSRC Multiplexing.......................................73
   14. References...................................................73
      14.1. Normative References....................................73
      14.2. Informative References..................................74
   15. Authors' Addresses...........................................75
   Intellectual Property Statement..................................76
   Disclaimer of Validity...........................................77
   Copyright Statement..............................................77
   Acknowledgement..................................................77
   16. Open Issues..................................................77
   17. Changes Log..................................................78
   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-09......78
   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-09 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-10......80


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-10 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-11......80



1. Introduction

   This memo specifies an RTP [RFC3550] payload format for the Scalable
   Video Coding (SVC) extension of the H.264/AVC video coding standard.
   Formally, SVC takes the form of Amendment 3 to ISO/IEC 14496 Part 10
   [MPEG4-10], and Annex G of ITU-T Rec. H.264/AVC [H.264]. The
   specification of SVC is available in [SVC].

   SVC covers the whole application ranges of H.264/AVC, starting with
   low bit-rate Internet streaming applications to HDTV broadcast and
   Digital Cinema with nearly lossless coding and requiring dozens or
   hundreds of MBit/s.

   This memo defines a backwards compatible enhancement to the H264/AVC
   payload format [RFC3984], in which the specific features introduced
   by SVC are taken into account. [Edt. Note (AE): Review backwards
   compatibility assertion, and qualify, when memo is completed.]
   Specifically, it documents the enhancements relevant from an RTP
   transport viewpoint, and defines signaling support for SVC, including
   a new media subtype name.

2. Conventions

   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 BCP 14, RFC 2119
   [RFC2119].

   This specification uses the notion of setting and clearing a bit when
   bit fields are handled.  Setting a bit is the same as assigning that
   bit the value of 1 (On).  Clearing a bit is the same as assigning
   that bit the value of 0 (Off).

3. The SVC Codec

3.1. Overview

   SVC defines a coded video representation in which a given bitstream
   offers representations of the source material at different levels of
   fidelity (hence the term "scalable").  Scalable video coding
   bitstreams, or scalable bitstreams, are constructed in a pyramidal
   fashion: the coding process creates bitstream components that improve
   the fidelity of hierarchically lower components.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   The fidelity dimensions offered by SVC are spatial (picture size),
   quality (or Signal-to-Noise Ratio - SNR), as well as temporal
   (pictures per second).  Bitstream components associated with a given
   level of spatial, quality, and temporal fidelity are identified using
   corresponding parameters in the bitstream: dependency_id, quality_id,
   and temporal_id (see also Section 3.3).  The fidelity identifiers
   have integer values, where higher values designate components that
   are higher in the hierarchy.  It is noted that SVC offers significant
   flexibility in terms of how an encoder may choose to structure the
   dependencies between the various components.  Decoding of a
   particular component requires the availability of all the components
   it depends upon, either directly, or indirectly.  An operation point
   of an SVC bitstream consists of the bistream components required to
   be able to decode a particular dependency_id, quality_id, and
   temporal_id combination.

   SVC maintains the bitstream organization introduced in H.264/AVC.
   Specifically, all bitstream components are encapsulated in Network
   Abstraction Layer (NAL) units which are organized as Access Units
   (AU).  An AU is associated with a single sampling instance in time.
   A subset of the NAL unit types correspond to the Video Coding Layer
   (VCL), and contain the coded picture data associated with the source
   content.  Coded picture data at the various fidelity dimensions are
   organized in slices.  Within one AU, a coded picture of an operation
   point consists of all the coded slices required for decoding up to
   the particular combination of dependency_id and quality_id values  at
   the time instance corresponding to the AU.  The NAL encapsulates each
   slice generated by the VCL into one or more NAL units.  Please
   consult RFC 3984 for a more in-depth discussion of the NAL unit
   concept.  SVC specifies the decoding order of NAL units.

   It is noted that the concept of temporal scalability is already
   present in H.264/AVC as profiles defined in Annex A of [H.264]
   already support it.  Specifically, in [H.264] sub-sequences have been
   introduced in order to allow optional use of temporal layers.  SVC
   extends this approach by exposing the temporal scalability
   information using the temporal_id parameter, alongside the
   dependency_id and quality_id values that are used for spatial and
   quality scalability.  For coded picture data defined in Annex G of
   [SVC] this is accomplished by using a new type of NAL unit where the
   fidelity parameters are part of its header.  For coded picture data
   that follow H.264/AVC, and to ensure compatibility with existing
   H.264/AVC receivers, a new type of "prefix" NAL unit has been defined
   to carry this header information.  This prefix NAL unit type is among
   those ignored by H.264/AVC receivers as explained in [RFC3984].




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   Within an AU, the VCL NAL units associated with a given dependency_id
   and quality_id are referred to as a "layer representation".  The
   layer representation corresponding to the lowest values of
   dependency_id and quality_id (i.e., zero) is the base layer
   representation and is compliant by design to H.264/AVC.  The set of
   VCL and associated non-VCL NAL units across all AUs in a bitstream
   associated with a particular combination of values of dependency_id
   and quality_id, and regardless of the value of temporal_id, is
   conceptually a scalable layer.  Due to the backwards compatibility
   with H.264/AVC, it is important to differentiate however whether or
   not SVC-specific NAL units are present in a given bitstream or not.
   This is particularly important for the lowest fidelity values in
   terms of dependency_id and quality_id (zero for both), as the
   corresponding VCL data are compliant to H.264/AVC, and may or may not
   be accompanied by associated prefix NAL units.  This memo therefore
   uses the term "AVC base layer" to designate the layer that contains
   only H.264/AVC VCL NAL units, and "SVC base layer" to designate the
   same layer but with the addition of the associated SVC prefix NAL
   units.  Note that the SVC specification [SVC] uses the term "base
   layer" for what in this memo will be referred to as "AVC base layer".
   Similarly, it is also important to be able to differentiate, within a
   layer, the temporal fidelity components it contains.  This memo uses
   the term "T0" to indicate, within a particular layer, the subset that
   contains the NAL units associated with temporal_id equal to 0.

   The term "layer" is used in various contexts in this memo.  For
   example, in the terms "Video Coding Layer" and "Network Abstraction
   Layer" it refers to conceptual organization levels.  When referring
   to bitstream syntax elements such as block layer or macroblock layer,
   it refers to hierarchical bitstream structure levels.  When used in
   the context of bitstream scalability, e.g., "AVC base layer", it
   refers to a level of representation fidelity of the source signal
   with a specific set of NAL units included.  The correct
   interpretation is supported by providing the appropriate context.

   SNR scalability in SVC is offered in two different ways.  In what is
   called Coarse-Grained Scalability (CGS), scalability is provided by
   including or excluding a complete layer when decoding a particular
   bitstream.  In contrast, in Medium-Grained Scalability (MGS),
   scalability is provided by selectively omitting the decoding of
   specific NAL units belonging to MGS layers.  The selection of the NAL
   units to omit can be based on fixed length fields in the NAL unit
   header.






Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


3.2. Parameter Set Concept

   The parameter set concept is inherited from [H.264].  Please refer to
   section 1.2 of RFC 3984 for more details.

   SVC introduced a new type of sequence parameter set, referred to as a
   subset sequence parameter set [SVC].  Subset sequence parameter sets
   have NAL unit type equal to 15, which is different from the NAL unit
   type value (7) of sequence parameter set.  VCL NAL units of NAL unit
   type 1 to 5 must only (indirectly) refer to sequence parameter sets,
   while VCL NAL units of NAL unit type 20 must only (indirectly) refer
   to subset sequence parameter sets.  Subset sequence parameter sets
   use a separate identifier value space than sequence parameter sets.
   An overview of the NAL unit and packet types used in this memo can be
   found in Table 1. in section 3.3. .

   In SVC, coded picture data from different layers may use the same or
   different sequence and picture parameter sets.  At any time instant
   during the decoding process there may be one active sequence
   parameter set (for the layer representation with the highest value of
   (dependency_id * 16 + quality_id)) and one or more active layer SVC
   sequence parameter set(s) (for layer representations with lower
   values of (dependency_id * 16 + quality_id)).  The active sequence
   parameter set or an active layer SVC sequence parameter set remains
   unchanged throughout a coded video sequence in the scalable layer in
   which the active sequence parameter set or active layer SVC sequence
   parameter set is referred to.  This means that the referred sequence
   parameter set or subset sequence parameter set can only change at IDR
   access units for any layer.  At any time instant during the decoding
   process there may be one active picture parameter set (for the layer
   representation with the highest value of (dependency_id * 16 +
   quality_id)) and one or more active layer picture parameter set(s)
   (for layer representations with lower values of (dependency_id * 16 +
   quality_id)).  The active picture parameter set or an active layer
   picture parameter set remains unchanged throughout a layer
   representation in which the active picture parameter set or active
   layer picture parameter set is referred to, but may change from one
   AU to the next.

3.3. Network Abstraction Layer Unit Header

   SVC NAL units of type 20 encapsulate VCL data as defined in Annex G
   of [SVC].  A special type of an SVC NAL unit is the prefix NAL unit
   (type 14) that includes descriptive information of the associated
   H.264/AVC VCL NAL unit (type 1 or 5) that immediately follows the
   prefix NAL unit.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   The following table gives an overview of NAL unit and packet types
   used in this memo and gives pointers to their definitions.

   Table 1.  Summary of NAL unit and packet types used in this memo



   Type  Description                Definition in  [RC3984] / this memo

   ---------------------------------------------------------------------

   0     unspecified                                  -     / -

   1-23  NAL unit per [H.264]/Single NAL unit packet  5.6   / 6.3.

   14    Prefix NAL unit per [SVC]                    -     / 3.1.

   15    Subset sequence parameter set per [SVC]      -     / 3.2.

   20    Slice in scalable extensions per [SVC]       -     / 3.3.

   24    Single-time aggregation packet (STAP-A)      5.7.1 / 6.7.

   25    Single-time aggregation packet (STAP-B)      5.7.1 / 6.7.

   26    Multi-time aggregation packet (MTAP16)       5.7.2 / 6.7.

   27    Multi-time aggregation packet (MTAP24)       5.7.2 / 6.7.

   28    Fragmentation unit (FU-A)                    5.8   / 6.8.

   29    Fragmentation unit with DON (FU-B)           5.8   / 6.8.

   30    Payload Content Scalability Info. (PACSI)    -     / 6.9.

   31    unspecified                                  -     / -



   SVC extends the one-byte H.264/AVC NAL unit header by three
   additional octets for NAL units of type 14 and 20.  The header
   indicates the type of the NAL unit, the (potential) presence of bit
   errors or syntax violations in the NAL unit payload, information
   regarding the relative importance of the NAL unit for the decoding
   process, the layer identification information, and other fields as
   discussed below.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   The syntax and semantics of the NAL unit header are formally
   specified in [SVC], but the essential properties of the NAL unit
   header are summarized below.

   The first byte of the NAL unit header has the following format (the
   bit fields are the same as defined for the one-byte H.264/AVC NAL
   unit header, while the semantics of some fields have changed
   slightly, in a backward compatible way):

         +---------------+
         |0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
         |F|NRI|  Type   |
         +---------------+

   The semantics of the components of the NAL unit type octet, as
   specified in the H.264 specification, are described briefly below.

   F: 1 bit
      forbidden_zero_bit.  H.264/AVC declares a value of 1 as a syntax
      violation.

   NRI: 2 bits
      nal_ref_idc.  A value of '00' (in binary form) indicates that the
      content of the NAL unit is not used to reconstruct reference
      pictures for future prediction.  Such NAL units can be discarded
      without risking the integrity of the reference pictures in the
      same Layer.  A value greater than '00' indicates that the
      decoding of the NAL unit is required to maintain the integrity of
      reference pictures in the same Layer, or that the NAL unit
      contains parameter sets.

   Type: 5 bits
      nal_unit_type.  This component specifies the NAL unit type as
      defined in table 7-1 of [SVC], and later within this memo.  For a
      reference of all currently defined NAL unit types and their
      semantics, please refer to section 7.4.1 in [SVC].

      In H.264/AVC, NAL unit types 14, 15 and 20 are reserved for
      future extensions.  SVC uses these three NAL unit types.  NAL
      unit type 14 is used for prefix NAL unit, NAL unit type 15 is
      used for subset sequence parameter set and NAL unit type 20 is
      used for coded slice in scalable extension (see section 7.4.1 in
      [SVC]).  NAL unit types 14 and 20 indicate the presence of three
      additional octets in the NAL unit header, as shown below.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


            +---------------+---------------+---------------+
            |0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
            +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
            |R|I|   PRID    |N| DID |  QID  | TID |U|D|O| RR|
            +---------------+---------------+---------------+

   R: 1 bit
      reserved_one_bit.  Reserved bit for future extension.  R MUST be
      equal to 1.  Receivers SHOULD ignore the value of R.

   I: 1 bit
      idr_flag.  This component specifies whether the layer
      representation is an instantaneous decoding refresh (IDR) layer
      representation (when equal to 1) or not (when equal to 0).

   PRID: 6 bits
      priority_id.  This flag specifies a priority identifier for the
      NAL unit.  A lower value of PRID indicates a higher priority.

   N: 1 bit
      no_inter_layer_pred_flag.  This flag specifies, when present in a
      coded slice NAL unit, whether inter-layer prediction may be used
      for decoding the coded slice (when equal to 1) or not (when equal
      to 0).

   DID: 3 bits
      dependency_id.  This component indicates the inter-layer coding
      dependency level of a layer representation.  At any access unit,
      a layer representation with a given dependency_id may be used for
      inter-layer prediction for coding of a layer representation with
      a higher dependency_id, while a layer representation with a given
      dependency_id shall not be used for inter-layer prediction for
      coding of a layer representation with a lower dependency_id.

   QID: 4 bits
      quality_id.  This component indicates the quality level of an MGS
      layer representation.  At any access unit and for identical
      dependency_id values, a layer representation with quality_id
      equal to ql uses a layer representation with quality_id equal to
      ql-1 for inter-layer prediction.

   TID: 3 bits
      temporal_id.  This component indicates the temporal level of a
      layer representation.  The temporal_id is associated with the
      frame rate, with lower values of _temporal_id corresponding to
      lower frame rates.  A layer representation at a given temporal_id
      typically depends on layer representations with lower temporal_id


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      values, but it never depends on layer representations with higher
      temporal_id values.

   U: 1 bit
      use_ref_base_pic_flag.  A value of 1 indicates that only
      reference base pictures are used during the inter prediction
      process.  A value of 0 indicates that the reference base pictures
      are not used during the inter prediction process.

   D: 1 bit
      discardable_flag.  A value of 1 indicates that the current NAL
      unit is not used for decoding NAL units with values of
      dependency_id higher than the one of the current NAL unit, in the
      current and all subsequent access units.  Such NAL units can be
      discarded without risking the integrity of layers with higher
      dependency_id values.  discardable_flag equal to 0 indicates that
      the decoding of the NAL unit is required to maintain the
      integrity of layers with higher dependency_id.

   O: 1 bit
      output_flag: Affects the decoded picture output process as
      defined in Annex C of [SVC].

   RR: 2 bits
      reserved_three_2bits.  Reserved bits for future extension.  RR
      MUST be equal to '11' (in binary form).  Receivers SHOULD ignore
      the value of RR.

   This memo reuses the same additional NAL unit types introduced in RFC
   3984, which are presented in section 6.3.   In addition, this memo
   introduces one OPTIONAL NAL unit type, 30, as specified in section
   6.9. . These NAL unit types are marked as unspecified in [SVC] and
   intentionally reserved for use in systems specifications like this
   memo.  Moreover, this specification extends the semantics of F, NRI,
   I, PRID, DID, QID, TID, U, and D per [SVC] as described in section
   6.4.

4. Scope

   This payload specification can only be used to carry the "naked" NAL
   unit stream over RTP, and not the byte stream format according to
   Annex B of [SVC].  The likely applications of this specification will
   be in the IP based multimedia communications fields including
   conversational multimedia, video telephony or video conferencing,
   Internet streaming and TV over IP.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   This specification allows, in a given RTP stream, to encapsulate NAL
   units belonging to

   o  the T0 AVC base layer or the T0 SVC base layer only, as detailed
      in [RFC3984], or

   o  one or more enhancement layers, or

   o  the T0 SVC base layer, and one or more enhancement layers

   Session multiplexing SHOULD be used when different receivers in the
   multicast session may request different operation points of the
   scalable bitstream.  In session multiplexing, layers are carried in
   multiple RTP sessions, and each RTP session is associated with one
   RTP stream.  The RTP stream in each RTP session MAY carry one or more
   layers, which can be any of the above three.  When each operation
   point corresponding to a layer may be required by some receivers,
   then each Layer SHOULD be carried in its own RTP stream and its own
   RTP session.  When fewer operation points are required by the
   receivers, then multiple layers MAY be encapsulated within one RTP
   stream in one RTP session.

         Informative note: Layered multicast is a term commonly used to
         describe the application where multicast is used to transmit
         data that has been encapsulated into more than one RTP session
         using session multiplexing.  This application allows different
         receivers in the multicast session to receive different
         operation points of the scalable bitstream.  Layered
         multicast, among other application examples, is discussed in
         more detail in the informative Section 13.2. .

   When session multiplexing is not used, the following applies.

   o  When an H.264/AVC compatible subset of the SVC base layer is
      transmitted, the subset SHOULD be carried in one RTP stream that
      MUST be encapsulated according to RFC 3984.  This way, a legacy
      RFC 3984 receiver will be able to receive the H.264/AVC compatible
      bitstream subset.

   o  When a set of layers including one or more SVC enhancement layers
      is transmitted, the set SHOULD be carried in one RTP stream that
      SHOULD be encapsulated according to this memo.

   This RTP payload specification is designed to be unaware of the octet
   string in the NAL unit payload defined in [SVC].  The NAL unit header
   defined in [SVC] co-serves as the payload header of this RTP payload
   format, when single NAL unit packetization is used, i.e. one NAL unit


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   per RTP packet.  In this case, the payload of a NAL unit follows
   immediately.  Additionally to [RFC3984], this memo locally defines a
   NAL unit type in the unspecified NAL unit type space of [SVC].  If
   other than the single NAL unit packetization mode is used as defined
   in [RFC3984] or this memo, locally defined NAL unit types may be
   additionally present in the RTP packets, together with one or more
   NAL unit types as specified in [SVC].

5. Definitions and Abbreviations

5.1. Definitions

5.1.1. Definitions Per SVC Specification

   This document uses the definitions of [SVC].  The following terms,
   defined in [SVC], are summed up for convenience:

      access unit: A set of NAL units always containing exactly one
      primary coded picture.  In addition to the primary coded picture,
      an access unit may also contain one or more redundant coded
      pictures, one auxiliary coded picture, or other NAL units not
      containing slices or slice data partitions of a coded picture.
      The decoding of an access unit always results in a decoded
      picture.

      base layer: A bitstream subset that contains all the NAL units
      with the nal_unit_type syntax element equal to 1 or 5 of the
      bitstream and does not contain any NAL unit with the
      nal_unit_type syntax element equal to 14, 15, or 20 and conforms
      to one or more of the profiles specified in Annex A of [H.264].

      base quality layer representation: The layer representation of
      the target dependency representation of an access unit that is
      associated with the quality_id syntax element equal to 0.

      coded video sequence: A sequence of access units that consists,
      in decoding order, of an IDR access unit followed by zero or more
      non-IDR access units including all subsequent access units up to
      but not including any subsequent IDR access unit.

      dependency representation: A subset of VCL NAL units within an
      access unit that are associated with the same value of the
      dependency_id syntax element, which is provided as part of the
      NAL unit header or by an associated prefix NAL unit.  A
      dependency representation consist of one or more layer
      representations.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      IDR access unit: An access unit in which the primary coded
      picture is an IDR picture.

      IDR picture: A coded picture in which all slices of the target
      dependency representation within the access unit are I or EI
      slices that causes the decoding process to mark all reference
      pictures as "unused for reference" immediately after decoding the
      IDR picture.  After the decoding of an IDR picture all following
      coded pictures in decoding order can be decoded without inter
      prediction from any picture decoded prior to the IDR picture.
      The first picture of each coded video sequence is an IDR picture.

      layer representation: A subset of VCL NAL units within an access
      unit that are associated with the same values of the
      dependency_id and quality_id syntax elements, which are provided
      as part of the VCL NAL unit header or by an associated prefix NAL
      unit.  One or more layer representations represent a dependency
      representation.

      prefix NAL unit: A NAL unit with nal_unit_type equal to 14 that
      immediately precedes in decoding order a NAL unit with
      nal_unit_type equal to 1, 5, or 12.  The NAL unit that
      immediately succeeds in decoding order the prefix NAL unit is
      referred to as the associated NAL unit.  The prefix NAL unit
      contains data associated with the associated NAL unit, which are
      considered to be part of the associated NAL unit.

      reference base picture: A reference picture that is obtained by
      decoding a base quality layer representation with the nal_ref_idc
      syntax element not equal to 0 and the store_ref_base_pic_flag
      syntax element equal to 1 of an access unit and all layer
      representations of the access unit that are referred to by inter-
      layer prediction of the base quality layer representation.  A
      reference base picture is not an output of the decoding process,
      but the samples of a reference base picture may be used for inter
      prediction in the decoding process of subsequent pictures in
      decoding order.  Reference base picture is a collective term for
      a reference base field or a reference base frame.

      scalable bitstream: A bitstream with the property that one or
      more bitstream subsets that are not identical to the scalable
      bitstream form another bitstream that conforms to the SVC
      specification[SVC].

      target dependency representation: The dependency representation
      of an access unit that is associated with the largest value of



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      the dependency_id syntax element for all dependency
      representations of the access unit.

      target layer representation: The layer representation of the
      target dependency representation of an access unit that is
      associated with the largest value of the quality_id syntax
      element for all layer representations of the target dependency
      representation of the access unit.

5.1.2. Definitions Local to This Memo

      anchor layer representation: An anchor layer representation is
      such a layer representation that, if decoding of the operation
      point corresponding to the layer starts from the access unit
      containing this layer representation, all the following layer
      representations of the layer, in output order, can be correctly
      decoded.  An anchor layer representation is a random access point
      to the layer the anchor layer representation belongs to.
      However, some layer representations, succeeding an anchor layer
      representation in decoding order but preceding the anchor layer
      representation in output order, may refer to earlier layer
      representations for inter prediction, and hence may not be
      correctly decoded if random access is performed at the anchor
      layer representation.

      AVC base layer: The subset of the SVC base layer in which all
      prefix NAL units (type 14) are removed. Note that this is
      equivalent to the term "base layer" as defined in Annex G of
      [SVC].

      base RTP session: The RTP session, among all the RTP sessions
      using session multiplexing, that carries the RTP stream
      containing the T0 AVC base layer or the T0 SVC base layer, and
      zero or more enhancement layers.  This RTP session does not
      depend on any other RTP session as indicated by mechanisms
      defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-dependency].  The base RTP
      session may carry NAL units of NAL unit type equal to 14 and 15.

      enhancement RTP session: An RTP session, among all the RTP
      sessions using session multiplexing, that is not the base RTP
      session.  An enhancement RTP session typically contains an RTP
      stream that depends on at least one other RTP session as
      indicated by mechanisms defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-
      dependency].  A lower RTP session to an enhancement RTP session
      is an RTP session which the enhancement RTP session depends on.
      The lowest RTP session for a receiver is the RTP session that
      does not depend on any other RTP session received by the


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      receiver.  The highest RTP session for a receiver is the RTP
      session which no other RTP session received by the receiver
      depends on.

      cross-session decoding order number (CS-DON): A derived variable
      indicating NAL unit decoding order number over all NAL units
      within all the session-multiplexed RTP sessions that carry the
      same SVC bitstream.

      enhancement layer: A layer in which at least one of the values of
      dependency_id or quality_id is higher than 0, or a layer in which
      none of the NAL units is associated with the value of temporal_id
      equal to 0.  An operation point constructed using the maximum
      temporal_id, dependency_id, and quality_id values associated with
      an enhancement layer may or may not conform to one or more of the
      profiles specified in Annex A of [H.264].

      H.264/AVC compatible: A biststream subset that conforms to one or
      more of the profiles specified in Annex A of [H.264].

      intra layer representation:  A layer representation that contains
      only slices that use intra prediction, and hence do not refer to
      any earlier layer representation in decoding order in the same
      layer.  Note that in [SVC] intra prediction includes intra-layer
      intra prediction as well as inter-layer intra prediction.

      layer: A bistream subset in which all NAL units of type 1, 5, 12,
      14, or 20 have the same values of dependency_id and quality_id,
      either directly through their NAL unit header (for NAL units of
      type 14 or 20) or through association to a prefix (type 14) NAL
      unit (for NAL unit types 1, 5, or 12).  A layer may contain NAL
      units associated with more than one values of temporal_id.

      operation point: An operation point is identified by a set of
      values of temporal_id, dependency_id, and quality_id. A bistream
      corresponding to an operation point can be constructed by
      removing all NAL units associated with a higher value of
      dependency_id, and all NAL units associated with the same value
      of dependency_id but higher values of quality_id or temporal_id.
      Additional NAL units may be removed (with lower dependency_id or
      same dependency_id but lower quality_id) if they are not required
      for decoding the bitstream at the particular operation point. An
      operation point bitstream conforms to at least one of the
      profiles defined in Annex A or Annex G of [SVC], and offers a
      representation of the original video signal at a certain
      fidelity. [Ed.Note(YkW): Need to check whether a bitstream subset



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      with those additional NAL units removed is a conforming
      bitstream.]

      operation point representation: The set of all NAL units of an
      operation point within the same access unit.

      RTP packet stream: A sequence of RTP packets with increasing
      sequence numbers (except for wrap-around), identical PT and
      identical SSRC (Synchronization Source), carried in one RTP
      session.  Within the scope of this memo, one RTP packet stream is
      utilized to transport one or more layers.

      session multiplexing: This specifies that the SVC bitstream is
      distributed across multiple RTP packet streams, with each stream
      having a unique SSRC, and its own timestamp and sequence number
      spaces.  Those multiple streams can be associated using the RTCP
      CNAME, or explicit signalling of the SSRC used.  They can be
      multiplexed onto a single transport layer connection, or split
      across multiple transport layer connections, as appropriate.  In
      all cases, you have a single RTP session (and hence a single SSRC
      space).  Dependency between RTP sessions MUST be signaled
      according to [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-dependency] and this memo.

      SVC base layer: The layer that includes all NAL units associated
      with dependency_id and quality_id values both equal to 0,
      including prefix NAL units (NAL unit type 14).

      SVC enhancement layer: A layer in which at least one of the
      values of dependency_id or quality_id is higher than 0.  An
      operation point constructed using the maximum dependency_id and
      quality_id values and any temporal_id value associated with an
      SVC enhancement layer does not conform to any of the profiles
      specified in Annex A of [H.264].

      SVC NAL unit: A NAL unit of NAL unit type 14, 15, or 20 as
      specified in Annex G of [SVC].

      SVC NAL unit header: A four-byte header resulting from the
      addition of a three-byte SVC-specific header extension added in
      NAL unit types 14, 15 and 20.

      SVC RTP session: Either the base RTP session or an enhancement
      RTP session.

      T0 AVC base layer: A subset of the AVC base layer constructed by
      removing all VCL NAL units associated with temporal_id values
      higher than 0.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 17]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      T0 SVC base layer: A subset of the SVC base layer constructed by
      removing all VCL NAL units associated with temporal_id values
      higher than 0 as well as their associated prefix NAL units.

5.2. Abbreviations

   In addition to the abbreviations defined in [RFC3984], the following
   ones are defined.

      CGS:        Coarse-Grain Scalability
      CS-DON:     Cross-Session Decoding Order Number
      MGS:        Medium-Grain Scalability
      PACSI:      Payload Content Scalability Information
      SVC:        Scalable Video Coding

6. RTP Payload Format

6.1. Design Principles

   The following design principles have been observed:

   o  Backward compatibility with [RFC3984] wherever possible.

   o  The SVC base layer or any H.264/AVC compatible subset of the SVC
      base layer, when transmitted in its own RTP stream, MUST be
        encapsulated using [RFC3984].  This ensures that such an RTP
      stream can be understood by RFC 3984 legacy receivers.

   o  MANEs as defined in [RFC3984] are signaling aware and rely on
      signaling information.  MANEs have state.

   o  MANEs can aggregate multiple RTP streams, possibly from multiple
      RTP sessions.

   o  MANEs can perform media-aware stream thinning.  By using the
      payload header information identifying Layers within an RTP
      session, MANEs are able to remove packets from the incoming RTP
      packet stream.  This implies rewriting the RTP headers of the
      outgoing packet stream and rewriting of RTCP Receiver Reports.

6.2. RTP Header Usage

   Please see section 5.1 of [RFC3984].

6.3. Common Structure of the RTP Payload Format

   Please see section 5.2 of [RFC3984].


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 18]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


6.4. NAL Unit Header Usage

   The structure and semantics of the NAL unit header were introduced in
   section 3.3. .  This section specifies the semantics of F, NRI, I,
   PRID, DID, QID, TID, U, and D according to this specification.

   The semantics of F specified in section 5.3 of [RFC3984] also applies
   herein.

   For NRI, for the bitstream conforming to one of the profiles defined
   in Annex A of [H.264] and transported using [RFC3984], the semantics
   specified in section 5.3 of [RFC3984] are applicable, i.e., NRI also
   indicates the relative importance of NAL units.  In an SVC context,
   in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [SVC], NRI also
   indicates the relative importance of NAL units within a layer.  [Edt.
   Note (YkW): "SVC context" to be clearly specified.]

   For I, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [SVC],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to protect NAL
   units with I equal to 1 better than NAL units with I equal to 0.
   MANEs MAY also utilize information of NAL units with I equal to 1 to
   decide when to forward more packets for an RTP packet stream. For
   example, when it is sensed that spatial layer switching has happened
   such that the operation point has changed to a higher value of DID,
   MANEs MAY start to forward NAL units with the higher value of DID
   only after forwarding a NAL unit with I equal to 1 with the higher
   value of DID.

   Note that, in the context of this section, "protecting a NAL unit"
   means any RTP or network transport mechanism that could improve the
   probability of success delivery of the packet conveying the NAL unit,
   including applying a QoS-enabled network, Forward Error Correction
   (FEC), retransmissions, and advanced scheduling behavior, whenever
   possible.

   For PRID, the semantics specified in Annex G of [SVC] applies.  Note,
   that MANEs implementing unequal error protection MAY use this
   information to protect NAL units with smaller PRID values better than
   those with larger PRID values, for example by including only the more
   important NAL units in an FEC protection mechanism.  The importance
   for the decoding process decreases as the PRID value increases.

   For DID, QID, TID, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G
   of [SVC], according to this memo, values of DID, QID, or TID indicate
   the relative importance in their respective dimension.  A lower value
   of DID, QID, or TID indicates a higher importance if the other two



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 19]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   components are identical.  MANEs MAY use this information to protect
   more important NAL units better than less important NAL units.

   For U, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [SVC],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to protect NAL
   units with U equal to 1 better than NAL units with U equal to 0.

   For D, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [SVC],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to determine
   whether a given NAL unit is required for successfully decoding a
   certain Operation Point of the SVC bitstream, hence to decide whether
   to forward the NAL unit.

6.5. Packetization Modes

   Section 5.4 of RFC 3984 applies when session multiplexing is not in
   use.  The packetization modes specified in Section 5.4 of RFC 3984
   are also referred to as session-specific packetization modes.

   When session multiplexing is in use, the following applies in
   addition.

6.5.1. Packetization Modes for Session Multiplexing

   This memo specifies four cases of session-multiplexing packetization
   modes when session multiplexing is in use:

   o  Non-interleaved timestamp based (NI-T) mode

   o  Non-interleaved CS-DON based (NI-C) mode

   o  Non-interleaved combined timestamp and CS-DON (NI-TC) mode

   o  Interleaved CS-DON (I-C) mode

   The NI-T, NI-C, and NI-TC modes are targeted for systems that require
   relatively low end-to-end latency, e.g. conversational systems. In
   the NI-T, NI-C, and NI-TC modes, NAL units in each RTP session are
   transmitted in NAL unit decoding order.  [Ed.Note(YkW): Add more
   introductions for each of the NI-T, NI-C and NI-TC modes.] The I-C
   mode is targeted for systems that do not require very low end-to-end
   latency.  The I-C mode allows transmission of NAL units out of NAL
   unit decoding order in each RTP session.

   The session-multiplexing packetization mode in use MAY be signaled by
   the value of the OPTIONAL pmode media type parameter or by external
   means.  When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-T", the NI-T mode


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 20]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   MUST be used.  When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-C", the NI-C
   mode MUST be used.  When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-TC" or
   pmode is not present, the NI-TC mode MUST be used.  When the value of
   pmode is equal to "I-C", the I-C mode MUST be used.  [Ed.Note(YkW):
   There MAY be at most one global pmode present in the SDP common for
   all the multiplexed RTP sessions.  It is also possible to have pmode
   session-specific in the SDP, but then all the multiplexed sessions
   MUST have the same value of this parameter.  When pmode is not
   present, the NI-TC mode is implied.]

   The used session-multiplexing packetization mode governs which
   session-specific packetization modes are allowed in the multiplexed
   RTP sessions, which in turn govern which NAL unit types are allowed
   as RTP payloads.

   Table 3.1 summarizes the allowed session-specific packetization modes
   for the NI-T, NI-C and NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization
   modes.  Table 3.2 summarizes the allowed session-specific
   packetization modes for the I-C session-multiplexing packetization
   mode.

    Table 3.1  Summary of allowed session-specific packetization modes
   for the NI-T, NI-C and NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization modes
                     (yes = allowed, no = disallowed)

      Session-Specific Mode    Base Session    Enhancement Session
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      Single NAL Unit Mode         yes             no
      Non-Interleaved Mode         yes            yes
      Interleaved Mode              no             no

    Table 3.2  Summary of allowed session-specific packetization modes
    for the I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode (yes = allowed,
                             no = disallowed)

      Session-Specific Mode    Base Session    Enhancement Session
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      Single NAL Unit Mode          no             no
      Non-Interleaved Mode          no             no
      Interleaved Mode             yes            yes

   Table 3.3 summarizes the allowed NAL unit types for each allowed
   session-specific packetization mode of the NI-T session-multiplexing
   packetization mode.  Table 3.4 summarizes the allowed NAL unit types
   for each allowed session-specific packetization mode of the NI-C and
   NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization modes.  Table 3.5 summarizes
   the allowed NAL unit types for the only allowed session-specific


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 21]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   packetization mode (i.e. the interleaved mode) of the I-C session-
   multiplexing packetization mode.



      Table 3.3  Summary of allowed NAL unit types for each session-
       specific packetization mode of the NI-T session-multiplexing
     packetization mode (yes = allowed, no = disallowed, ig = ignore)

      Type   Packet    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved
                       Unit Mode           Mode
      ------------------------------------------------
      0      undefined     ig               ig
      1-23   NAL unit     yes              yes
      24     STAP-A        no              yes
      25     STAP-B        no               no
      26     MTAP16        no               no
      27     MTAP24        no               no
      28     FU-A          no              yes
      29     FU-B          no               no
      30     PACSI         no               no
      31     NI-MTAP       no              yes

      Table 3.4  Summary of allowed NAL unit types for each session-
        specific packetization mode of the NI-C and NI-TC session-
   multiplexing packetization modes (yes = allowed, no = disallowed, ig
                                 = ignore)

      Type   Packet    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved
                       Unit Mode           Mode
      ------------------------------------------------
      0      undefined     ig               ig
      1-23   NAL unit     yes              yes
      24     STAP-A        no              yes
      25     STAP-B        no               no
      26     MTAP16        no               no
      27     MTAP24        no               no
      28     FU-A          no              yes
      29     FU-B          no               no
      30     PACSI        yes              yes
      31     NI-MTAP       no              yes








Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 22]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008




   Table 3.5  Summary of allowed NAL unit types for the session-specific
   packetization mode of the I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode
               (yes = allowed, no = disallowed, ig = ignore)

      Type   Packet    Interleaved
                         Mode
      ------------------------------
      0      undefined     ig
      1-23   NAL unit      no
      24     STAP-A        no
      25     STAP-B       yes
      26     MTAP16       yes
      27     MTAP24       yes
      28     FU-A         yes
      29     FU-B         yes
      30     PACSI         no
      31     undefined     no

   The NAL unit type values indicated as undefined in Tables 3.3, 3.4
   and 3.5 are reserved for future extensions.  NAL units of those types
   SHOULD NOT be sent by a sender and MUST be ignored by a receiver.
   Note that NAL unit type 30 and 31 are indicated as undefined in RFC
   3984, therefore RFC 3984 receivers MUST ignore NAL units of this
   type, if present.

6.6. Decoding Order Number (DON)

   Section 5.5 of [RFC3984] applies when session multiplexing is not in
   use.

   When session multiplexing is in use, the following applies in
   addition.

6.6.1. Cross-Session DON (CS-DON) for Session Multiplexing

   When the NI-C or NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode is in
   use, the packetization of each session MUST be as specified in
   Section 7.1. , and the following applies for the derivation of the
   CS-DON value for each non-PACSI NAL unit.








Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 23]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  For each non-PACSI NAL unit carried in a session using the single
      NAL unit session-specific packetization mode, the CS-DON value of
      the NAL unit is equal to (DONC_prev_PACSI + SN_diff - 1) % 65536,
      wherein '%' stands for modulo operation, DONC_prev_PACSI is the
      DONC value of the previous PACSI NAL unit with the same NALU time
      as the current NAL unit, and SN_diff is calculated as follows
      (assuming that the SN values of the current NAL unit and the
      previous PACSI NAL unit with the same NALU time as the current NAL
      unit are SN1 and SN2, respectively).

                 If SN1 > SN2, SN_diff = SN1 - SN2
                 Else SN_diff = SN2 + 65536 - SN1

   o  For non-PACSI NAL units carried in a session using the non-
      interleaved session-specific packetization mode, the CS-DON value
      of each non-PACSI NAL unit is derived as follows.

       . For a non-PACSI NAL unit in a single NAL unit packet, the
          following applies.

            . If the previous PACSI NAL unit is contained in a single
               NAL unit packet, the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is
               calculated as above when the single NAL unit session-
               specific packetization mode is in use;

            . Otherwise (the previous PACSI NAL unit is contained in an
               STAP-A packet), the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is equal
               to (the CS-DON value of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit
               in decoding order + 1) % 65536, wherein '%' stands for
               modulo operation.

       . For a non-PACSI NAL unit in an STAP-A packet, the following
          applies.

            . If the non-PACSI NAL unit is the first non-PACSI NAL unit
               in the STAP-A packet, the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is
               equal to DONC of the PACSI NAL unit in the STAP-A packet;

            . Otherwise (the non-PACSI NAL unit is not the first non-
               PACSI NAL unit in the STAP-A packet), the CS-DON value of
               the NAL unit is equal to (the CS-DON value of the
               previous non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding order + 1) %
               65536, wherein '%' stands for modulo operation.






Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 24]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


       . For a non-PACSI NAL unit in a number of FU-A packets, the CS-
          DON value of the NAL unit is calculated as above when the
          single NAL unit session-specific packetization mode is in use,
          with SN1 being the SN value of the start FU-A packet.

   When the I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode is in use, the
   DON values derived according to RFC 3984 of all the NAL units in each
   of the multiplexed RTP sessions MUST indicate CS-DON values.

6.7. Aggregation Packets

   Please see section 5.7 of [RFC3984].

6.8. Fragmentation Units (FUs)

   Please see section 5.8 of [RFC3984].

6.9. Payload Content Scalability Information (PACSI) NAL Unit

   A new NAL unit type is specified in this memo, and referred to as
   payload content scalability information (PACSI) NAL unit.  The
   OPTIONAL PACSI NAL unit, if present, MUST be the first NAL unit in an
   aggregation packet or the NAL unit in a single NAL unit packet, and
   it MUST NOT be present in other types of packets.  The PACSI NAL
   unit, when included in an aggregation packet, indicates scalability
   information and other characteristics that are common for all the
   remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation packet.
   Furthermore, a PACSI NAL unit MAY contain zero or more SEI NAL units.
   PACSI NAL unit makes it easier for MANEs to decide whether to
   forward/process/discard the aggregation packet containing the PACSI
   NAL unit.  Other reasons to use PACSI NAL units are explained later
   when specifying the semantics of the fields.  Senders MAY create
   PACSI NAL units and receivers MAY ignore them, or use them as hints
   to enable efficient aggregation packet processing or decoding order
   recovery in session multiplexing.  Note that the NAL unit type for
   the PACSI NAL unit is selected among those values that are
   unspecified in [SVC] and [RFC3984].

   When the first aggregation unit of an aggregation packet contains a
   PACSI NAL unit, there MUST be at least one additional aggregation
   unit present in the same packet.  The RTP header and payload header
   fields of the aggregation packet are set according to the remaining
   NAL units in the aggregation packet.

   When a PACSI NAL unit is included in a multi-time aggregation packet
   (MTAP), the decoding order number (DON) for the PACSI NAL unit MUST
   be set to indicate that the PACSI NAL unit has an identical DON to


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 25]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   the first NAL unit in decoding order among the remaining NAL units in
   the aggregation packet.

   When a PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet, the
   RTP header and payload header fields of the packet are set according
   to the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order.

   The structure of a PACSI NAL unit is as follows.  The first four
   octets are exactly the same as the four-byte SVC NAL unit header as
   discussed in section 3.3. .  They are followed by one always present
   octet, five optional octets, and zero or more SEI NAL units, each SEI
   NAL unit preceded by a 16-bit unsigned size field (in network byte
   order) that indicates the size of the following NAL unit in bytes
   (excluding these two octets, but including the NAL unit type octet of
   the SEI NAL unit).  Figure 1 illustrates the PACSI NAL unit structure
   and an example of a PACSI NAL unit containing two SEI NAL units.

   The bits A, P, C, S, and E are specified only if the bit X is equal
   to 1.  The fields TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID are present only if the bit
   Y is equal to 1.  The fields TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID MUST NOT be
   present if the bit Y is equal to 0.  The field DONC is present only
   if the bit T is equal to 1.  The field T MUST be equal to 0 if the
   aggregation packet containing the PACSI NAL unit is not an STAP-A
   packet.

























Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 26]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |F|NRI|  Type   |R|I|   PRID    |N| DID |  QID  | TID |U|D|O| RR|
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |X|Y|T|A|P|C|S|E| TL0PICIDX (o.)|        IDRPICID (o.)          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |          DONC (o.)            |        NAL unit size 1        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      |                 SEI NAL unit 1                                |
      |                                                               |
      |                         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         |        NAL unit size 2        |     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+     |
      |                                                               |
      |            SEI NAL unit 2                                     |
      |                                           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Figure 1  PACSI NAL unit structure.  Fields suffixed by
                               "(o.)" are OPTIONAL.

   The values of the fields in PACSI NAL unit MUST be set as follows.
   The term "target NAL unit" is used in the semantics of some fields.
   When the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet, a
   "target NAL unit" refers to one or more NAL units that are contained
   in the aggregation packet, but not included in the PACSI NAL unit
   itself, that are in the same access unit as the first NAL unit
   following the PACSI NAL unit in the aggregation packet.  When the
   PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet, a "target NAL
   unit" refers to the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order.

   o  The F bit MUST be set to 1 if the F bit in at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation packet is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or if the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order
      has the F bit equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a
      single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the F bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The NRI field MUST be set to the highest value of NRI field among
      all the remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation
      packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or the value of the NRI field of the next non-PACSI NAL
      unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in
      a single NAL unit packet).


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 27]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The Type field MUST be set to 30.

   o  The R bit MUST be set to 1.  Receivers SHOULD ignore the value of
      R.

   o  The I bit MUST be set to 1 if the I bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation packet is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or if the I bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the I bit MUST
      be set to 0.

   o  The PRID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the PRID values
      of all the remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation
      packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or the PRID value of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a
      single NAL unit packet).

   o  The N bit MUST be set to 1 if the N bit of all the remaining NAL
      units in the payload of the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the
      N bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL
      unit packet).  Otherwise, the N bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The DID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the DID values of
      all the remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation
      packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or the DID value of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a
      single NAL unit packet).

   o  o The QID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the QID values
      of all the remaining NAL units with the lowest value of DID in the
      payload of the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or the QID value of the next
      non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in a single NAL unit packet).

   o  The TID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the TID values of
      all the remaining NAL units with the lowest value of DID in the
      payload of the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or the TID value of the next
      non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in a single NAL unit packet).


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 28]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The U bit MUST be set to 1 if the U bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation packet is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or if the U bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the U bit MUST
      be set to 0.

   o  The D bit MUST be set to 1 if the D value of all the remaining NAL
      unit in the payload is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or if the D bit of the next
      non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is equal to 1 (when the
      PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).
      Otherwise, the D bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The O bit MUST be set to 1 if the O bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the payload of the aggregation packet is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation
      packet) or if the O bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the O bit MUST
      be set to 0.

   o  The RR field MUST be set to '11' (in binary form).  Receivers
      SHOULD ignore the value of RR.

   o  If the X bit is equal to 1, the bits A, P, and C are specified as
      below. Otherwise, the bits A, P, and C are unspecified, and
      receivers MUST ignore these bits.  The X bit SHOULD be identical
      for all the PACSI NAL units in all the RTP sessions carrying the
      same SVC bitstream.

   o  If the Y bit is equal to 1, the OPTIONAL fields TL0PICIDX and
      IDRPICID MUST be present and specified as below, and the bits S
      and E are also specified as below. Otherwise, the fields TL0PICIDX
      and IDRPICID MUST NOT be present, whereas the S and E bits are
      unspecified and receivers MUST ignore these bits.  The Y bit
      SHOULD be identical for all the PACSI NAL units in all the RTP
      sessions carrying the same SVC bitstream.

   o  If the T bit is equal to 1, the OPTIONAL field DONC MUST be
      present and specified as below. Otherwise, the field DONC MUST NOT
      be present.






Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 29]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The A bit MUST be set to 1 if all the target NAL units belong to
      anchor layer representations.  Otherwise, the A bit MUST be set to
      0.  The A bit SHOULD be identical for all the PACSI NAL units for
      which the target NAL units belong to the same access unit.

      Informative note: The A bit indicates whether CGS or spatial
      layer switching at a non-IDR layer representation (a layer
      representation with nal_unit_type not equal to 5 and idr_flag not
      equal to 1) can be performed.  When the coded pattern like IBBP
      is in use, non-IDR intra layer representation can be used for
      random access.  Compared to using only IDR layer representations,
      higher coding efficiency can be achieved.  The H.264/AVC or SVC
      solution to indicate the random accessibility of a non-IDR intra
      layer representation is using recovery point SEI message.
      However, with this A bit it is much easier to parse than to parse
      the recovery point SEI message, which may even be buried deeply
      in an SEI NAL unit.  Furthermore, the SEI message may not be
      present in the bitstream.

   o  The P bit MUST be set to 1 if all the remaining NAL units in the
      payload of the aggregation packet are with redundant_pic_cnt
      greater than 0 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission
      order is with redundant_pic_cnt greater than 0 (when the PACSI NAL
      unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the P
      bit MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: The P bit indicates whether a packet can be
      discarded because it contains only redundant slice NAL units.
      Without this bit, the corresponding information can be concluded
      from the syntax element redundant_pic_cnt, which is buried in the
      variable-length coded slice header.

   o  The C bit MUST be set to 1 if all the target NAL units belong to
      intra layer representations.  Otherwise, the C bit MUST be set to
      0.  The C bit SHOULD be identical for all the PACSI NAL units for
      which the target NAL units belong to the same access unit.

      Informative note: The C bit indicates whether a packet contains
      intra slices which may be the only packets to be forwarded for a
      fast forward playback, e.g. when the network condition is
      extremely bad.







Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 30]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The S bit MUST be set to 1, if the first VCL NAL unit, in decoding
      order, of the layer representation containing the first NAL unit
      following the PACSI NAL unit in the aggregation packet is present
      in the payload (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or if the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order is the first VCL NAL unit, in decoding order,
      of a layer representation (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in
      a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the S bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The E bit MUST be set to 1, if the last VCL NAL unit, in decoding
      order, of the layer representation containing the first NAL unit
      following the PACSI NAL unit in the aggregation packet is present
      in the payload (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or if the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order is the last VCL NAL unit, in decoding order, of
      a layer representation (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a
      single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the E field MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: The S or E bit indicates whether the first or
      last slice, in transmission order, of a layer representation is
      in a packet, to enable a MANE to detect slice loss and take
      proper action such as requesting a retransmission as soon as
      possible, as well as to allow an efficient playout buffer
      handling similarly as the M bit in the RTP header.  The M bit in
      the RTP header still indicates the end of an access unit, not the
      end of a layer representation.

   o  When present, the TL0PICIDX field MUST be set to equal to
      tl0_dep_rep_idx as specified in Annex G of [SVC] for the layer
      representation containing the first NAL unit following the PACSI
      NAL unit in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or containing the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).

   o  When present, the IDRPICID field MUST be set to equal to
      effective_idr_pic_id as specified in Annex G of [SVC] for the
      layer representation containing the first NAL unit following the
      PACSI NAL unit in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in an aggregation packet) or containing the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).

      Informative note: The TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID fields enable the
      detection of the loss of layer representations in the most
      important temporal layer, by receivers as well as MANEs.  SVC



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 31]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      includes a solution by using SEI messages, which are harder to
      parse and may not be present in the bitstream at all.

   o  When present, the field DONC indicates the cross-session decoding
      order number (CS-DON) for the first NAL unit of the remaining NAL
      units in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or the CS-DON of the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).

   The PACSI NAL unit SHALL include a subset (zero to all) of the SEI
   NAL units associated with the access unit to which the target NAL
   units belong, and SHALL NOT contain SEI NAL units associated with any
   other access unit.

      Informative note: Senders may repeat such SEI NAL units in the
      PACSI NAL unit the presence of which in more than one packet is
      essential for packet loss robustness.  Receivers may use the
      repeated SEI messages in place of missing SEI messages.  In
      H.264/AVC and SVC, within each access unit, SEI NAL units must
      appear before any VCL NAL unit in decoding order.  Therefore,
      without using PACSI NAL units, SEI messages are typically only
      conveyed in the first packet of those packets conveying an access
      unit.

   When the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet, an SEI
   message SHOULD NOT be included in the PACSI NAL unit and included in
   one of the remaining NAL units contained in the same aggregation
   packet.

6.10. Non-Interleaved Multi-Time Aggregation Packets (NI-MTAPs)

   A new NAL unit payload is introduced in this memo, known as the Non-
   Interleaved Multi-Time Aggregation PACKET (NI-MTAP).  An NI-MTAP
   consists of zero or more non-interleaved multi-time aggregation
   units, as presented in Figure 2.

   Informative note: The rule above differs from the constraint on
   aggregation packets in [RFC3984] to contain at least one NAL unit.

   The NI-MTAP consists of 16 bits of unsigned size information of the
   following NAL unit (in network byte order), and 16 bits (in network
   byte order) of timestamp offset (TS offset) for this NAL unit.

   The structure of the multi-time aggregation units for the NI-MTAP is
   presented in Figure 2.  The starting or ending position of an
   aggregation unit within a packet is MAY not be on a 32-bit word


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 32]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   boundary.  The NAL units in the NI-MTAP are ordered in NAL unit
   decoding order.

   The term NALU-time is defined as the value that the RTP timestamp
   would have if that NAL unit would be transported in its own RTP
   packet.

   The timestamp offset field MUST be set to a value equal to the value
   of the following formula: If the NALU-time is larger than or equal to
   the RTP timestamp of the packet, then the timestamp offset equals
   (the NALU-time of the NAL unit - the RTP timestamp of the packet).
   If the NALU-time is smaller than the RTP timestamp of the packet,
   then the timestamp offset is equal to the NALU-time + (2^32 - the RTP
   timestamp of the packet).

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :        NAL unit size          |        TS offset              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                         NAL unit                              |
   |                                                               |
   |                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

          Figure 2  Non-interleaved Multi-time aggregation unit for NI-
                                       MTAP

   For the "earliest" multi-time aggregation unit in an MTAP the
   timestamp offset MUST be zero.  Hence, the RTP timestamp of the MTAP
   itself is identical to the earliest NALU-time.

   Informative note: The "earliest" multi-time aggregation unit is the
   one that would have the smallest extended RTP timestamp among all the
   aggregation units of an MTAP if the aggregation units were
   encapsulated in single NAL unit packets.  An extended timestamp is a
   timestamp that has more than 32 bits and is capable of counting the
   wraparound of the timestamp field, thus enabling one to determine the
   smallest value if the timestamp wraps.  Such an "earliest"
   aggregation unit may not be the first one in the order in which the
   aggregation units are encapsulated in an NI-MTAP.  The "earliest" NAL
   unit need not be the same as the first NAL unit in the NAL unit
   decoding order either.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 33]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   Figure 3 presents an example of an RTP packet that contains a NI-MTAP
   multi-time aggregation packet that contains two non-interleaved
   multi-time aggregation units, labeled as 1 and 2 in the figure.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          RTP Header                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |NI-MTAPNAL HDR |            NALU 1 Size        | NALU 1 TS Off.|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | NALU 1 TS Off.|  NALU 1 HDR   |    NALU 1 DATA                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
   :                                                               :
   ++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++
   |            NALU 2 SIZE        |       NALU 2 TS Offset        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  NALU 2 HDR   |    NALU 2 DATA                                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               |
   :                                                               :
   |                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               :...OPTIONAL RTP padding        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 3  An RTP packet including a NI-MTAP non-interleaved
           multi-time aggregation packet and two non-interleaved multi-
                              time aggregation units

7. Packetization Rules

   Section 6 of [RFC3984] applies.  The following applies in addition.

   All receivers MUST support the single NAL unit packetization mode to
   provide backward compatibility to endpoints supporting only the
   single NAL unit mode of RFC 3984. However, the use of single NAL unit
   packetization mode (packetization-mode equal to 0) SHOULD be avoided
   whenever possible, because encapsulating NAL units of small sizes,
   e.g. small NAL units containing parameter sets, prefix NAL units, or
   SEI messages, in their own packets is typically less efficient
   because of the relatively big overhead.

   All receivers MUST support the non-interleaved mode of [RFC3984].

      Informative note: The non-interleaved mode allows an application
      to encapsulate a single NAL unit in a single RTP packet.
      Historically, the single NAL unit mode has been included into
      [RFC3984] only for compatibility with ITU-T Rec. H.241 Annex A


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 34]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      [H.241].  There is no point in carrying this historic ballast
      towards a new application space such as the one provided with
      SVC.  More technically speaking, the implementation complexity
      increase for providing the additional mechanisms of the non-
      interleaved mode (namely STAP-A and FU-A) is minor, and the
      benefits are great, that STAP-A and FU-A implementation is
      required.

   A NAL unit of small size SHOULD be encapsulated in an aggregation
   packet together with one or more other NAL units. For example, non-
   VCL NAL units such as access unit delimiter, parameter set, or SEI
   NAL unit are typically small.

   A prefix NAL unit and the NAL unit with which it is associated, and
   which follows the prefix NAL unit in decoding order, SHOULD be
   included in the same aggregation packet whenever an aggregation
   packet is used for the associated NAL unit.

      Informative note: When either the prefix NAL unit or the
      associated NAL unit containing an H.264/AVC coded slice is lost,
      the remaining one would be hardly useful in SVC context, wherein
      the prefix NAL unit must be available for decoded picture buffer
      management operations of the decoding process.

   When the first aggregation unit of an aggregation packet contains a
   PACSI NAL unit, there MUST be at least one additional aggregation
   unit present in the same packet.

7.1. Packetization Rules for Session Multiplexing

   When session multiplexing is used, decoding order recovery for NAL
   units carried in all the multiplexed RTP sessions is needed.  The
   following packetization rules ensure that decoding order of NAL units
   carried in the multiplexed sessions can be correctly recovered for
   each of the session-multiplexing packetization modes according to the
   de-packetization process specified in Section 8.1. .

7.1.1. NI-T / NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization rules.

  When the NI-T or NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode is in
  use, the following applies.

   o  If one or more NAL units of an access unit of sampling time
      instance X is present in RTP session A, then one or more NAL units
      of the same access unit of the same sampling time instance X MUST
      be present in any enhancement RTP session, which depends on RTP
      session A.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 35]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      Informative note:

      There are multiple ways to insert additional NAL units in order
      to satisfy the rule above, as described below:



      - First option for adding additional NAL units is to place NI-
      MTAP packets as specified in section 6.10. not including any
      aggregation packet in the payload.  It is important, that the
      process described in 8.1.1. takes these packets as placeholders
      for the access unit re-ordering process.

      - Additional NAL units may be also added by repeating prefix NAL
      units of NAL unit type 14, before passing NAL units to the
      decoder, re-ordering of the access unit as described in section
      7.1.4. is needed.  This may be only possible for access units
      which contain base layer NAL units.  [Edt.note(TS): It may be
      useful to indicate in the SDP parameters that additional NAL unit
      re-ordering as specified in 7.1.4. is not required.]

      - Additional NAL units may be also added by placing Single NAL
      unit packets containing exactly one PACSI NAL unit in the
      enhancement RTP sessions.

      - Additional NAL units may be also added by the encoder itself,
      this option may not be possible with pre-encoded content.



   o  When not using NI-TC mode and a PACSI NAL unit is present, the T
      bit MUST be equal to 0, i.e. the DONC field MUST NOT be present.

7.1.2. NI-C / NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode rules

   When the NI-C or NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode is in
   use, the following applies.

   o  For each single NAL unit packet containing a non-PACSI NAL unit,
      if present, the previous packet MUST have the same RTP timestamp
      as the single NAL unit packet, and the following applies.

       . If the NALU time of the non-PACSI NAL unit is not equal to the
          NALU time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding
          order, the previous packet MUST contain a PACSI NAL unit
          containing the DONC field;



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 36]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


       . Otherwise (the NALU time of the non-PACSI NAL unit is equal to
          the NALU time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding
          order), the previous packet MAY contain a PACSI NAL unit
          containing the DONC field.

   o  For each STAP-A packet, if present, the first NAL unit in the
      STAP-A packet MUST be a PACSI NAL unit containing the DONC field.

   o  For each FU-A packet, if present, the previous packet MUST have
      the same RTP timestamp as the FU-A packet, and the following
      applies.

       . If the FU-A packet is the start of the fragmented NAL unit, the
          following applies;

            . If the NALU time of the fragmented NAL unit is not equal
               to the NALU time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in
               decoding order, the previous packet MUST contain a PACSI
               NAL unit containing the DONC field;

            . Otherwise (the NALU time of the fragmented NAL unit is
               equal to the NALU time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit
               in decoding order), the previous packet MAY contain a
               PACSI NAL unit containing the DONC field.

       . Otherwise if the FU-A packet is the end of the fragmented NAL
          unit, the following applies.

            . If the next non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding order has NALU
               time equal to the NALU time of the fragmented NAL unit,
               and is carried in a number of FU-A packets or a single
               NAL unit packet, the next packet MUST be a single NAL
               unit packet containing a PACSI NAL unit containing the
               DONC field.

       . Otherwise (the FU-A packet is neither the start nor the end of
          the fragmented NAL unit), the previous packet MUST be a FU-A
          packet.

   o  For each single NAL unit packet containing a PACSI NAL unit, if
      present, the PACSI NAL unit MUST contain the DONC field.

7.1.3. I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode rules

   When the I-C session-multiplexing packetization mode is in use, the
   following applies.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 37]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  When a PACSI NAL unit is present, the T bit MUST be equal to 0,
      i.e. the DONC field MUST NOT be present.

7.1.4. Packetization rules for non-VCL NAL units

   NAL units which do not directly encode video slices are known in
   H.264 as Non-VCL NAL units.  Non-VCL units that are only used by, or
   relevant to, enhancement RTP sessions SHOULD be sent in the lowest
   session to which they are relevant.

   However, some senders (e.g., those sending pre-encoded data) might
   not be able to easily determine which non-VCL units are relevant to
   which sessions.  Thus, essential non-VCL NAL units (parameter sets
   sent in-band, i.e. NAL unit types 7, 8, 13, and 15) MAY, instead, be
   sent in a dependency of the session in which they are used (e.g. the
   base RTP session), and non-essential non-VCL NAL units MAY be sent in
   any RTP session.

   If a non-VCL unit is relevant to more than one RTP session, neither
   of which is a dependency of the other, the unit MAY be sent in a
   common dependency of the sessions, or MAY be repeated in both
   sessions.  In general, identical non-VCL units MAY be sent in more
   than one session, for redundancy.  [Ed.Note(JL): Can this cause
   issues with HRD timing?]

7.1.5. Packetization rules for Prefix NAL units

   When the base layer is sent on an RTP session using Non-Interleaved
   or Interleaved mode, Prefix NAL units SHOULD be aggregated (using
   STAP-A or STAP-B units) with the NAL unit they prefix, unless this
   would violate session MTU constraints or fragmentation units are in
   use.

   If the base layer is sent in a base RTP session using RFC 3984,
   Prefix NAL units MAY be sent in the lowest enhancement session rather
   than in the base RTP session.

8. De-Packetization Process

   For a single RTP session, the de-packetization process specified in
   section 7 of [RFC3984] applies [Edt. Note: with some fixes to section
   7 of RFC 3984 and some changes/additions to section 7.3 (Additional
   De-Packetization Guidelines) of RFC 3984 - TBD].

   For receiving more than one of multiple RTP sessions conveying the
   same scalable bitstream, the de-packetization process is specified in
   section 8.1. .


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 38]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


8.1. De-Packetization Process for Session Multiplexing

   As for a single RTP session, the general concept behind these de-
   packetization processes is to reorder NAL units from transmission
   order to the NAL unit decoding order.

   The sessions to be received SHALL be identified by mechanisms
   specified in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-dependency]. Enhancement RTP
   sessions typically contain an RTP stream that depends on at least one
   other RTP session, as indicated by mechanisms defined in [I-D.ietf-
   mmusic-decoding-dependency]. A lower RTP session to an enhancement
   RTP session is an RTP session which the enhancement RTP session
   depends on. The lowest RTP session for a receiver is the base RTP
   session, which does not depend on any other RTP session received by
   the receiver.  The highest RTP session for a receiver is the RTP
   session which no other RTP session received by the receiver depends
   on.

   For each of the RTP sessions, the RTP reception process as specified
   in RFC 3550 is applied.  Then the received packets are passed in
   increasing order of sequence number, into the payload de-
   packetization to NAL units as defined in this memo.

   The decoding order of the NAL units carried in all the multiplexed
   RTP sessions is then recovered by applying one of the following
   subsections, depending on which of the session-multiplexing
   packetization mode is in use.

8.1.1. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-T and NI-TC Modes

   The following process SHALL be applied when the NI-T session-
   multiplexing packetization mode is in use.  The following process MAY
   be applied when the NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode is
   in use.

   The process is based on RTP session dependency signaling, RTP
   sequence numbers, and timestamps.

   The decoding order of NAL units from multiple RTP streams in multiple
   RTP sessions SHALL be recovered into a single sequence of NAL units,
   grouped into access units, by performing any process equivalent to
   the following rules:







Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 39]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The decoding order of NAL units within RTP packet stream in RTP
      session z is given by the order of sequence number x of the RTP
      packets the NAL units are contained in.  And, in an aggregation
      packet contained in an RTP packet, the decoding order is given by
      the appearance of the NAL units NU(y) within the packet, where y
      is incremented by one per each NAL unit present in decoding order
      within the RTP session z.  Further, z gives the consecutive order
      of dependency of the received RTP sessions as indicated by
      mechanisms specified in 9.2.3. , where z equal to 0 identifies the
      base RTP session.

   o  Timing information according to the media timestamp TS(x) derived
      from the RTP packet timestamp of the RTP packet with sequence
      number x is associated with all NAL units NU(y) contained in the
      same RTP packet received in RTP session z.  All NAL units NU(y)
      associated with the same value of media timestamp TS are part of
      the same access unit AU(TS).  For NI-MTAP packets a TS is derived
      for each contained NAL unit by using the "TS offset" valuein the
      NI-MTAP packet as defined in 6.10. .

   o  Each NI-MTAP packet which does not contain any aggregation units
      or each PACSI NAL unit in a single NAL unit packet SHOULD be kept
      as placeholder NAL unit in the re-ordering process.  NI-MTAP or
      PACSI NAL units SHOULD be removed before passing access unit data
      to the decoder.

         Informative Note: Placeholder NAL units are used to associate
         NAL units present in other RTP sessions with RTP sessions not
         containing any data for an access unit of a particular time
         instance.  This association process may be required for
         satisfying the rules in 7.1.1. .

   o  For decoding order recovery, the process as describe below SHALL
      be applied:

       o  The process SHOULD be started with the NAL units NU(y)
          received in the highest RTP enhancement session h with the
          first timestamp TS available in decoding order in the (de-
          jittering) buffer of RTP session h.

       o  Collect all NAL units NU(y) in decoding order associated with
          the same value of timestamp TS, starting from the highest RTP
          enhancement session z in all the (de-jittering) buffers of the
          received RTP sessions z.  NAL units contained in aggregation
          or fragmentation packets are handled as NAL units extracted
          from single NAL unit packets with their own timestamp.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 40]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


       o  Place the collected NAL units in the consecutive order of z
          and then in the decoding order within session z into access
          unit AU(TS) associated with timestamp value TS while
          satisfying the NAL unit order rules in SVC access units as
          specified in [SVC] and summarized as an informative algorithm
          in section 7.1.4. .

       o  Access units MAY be transferred to the decoder.  If access
          units AU(TS) are transferred to the decoder, they SHALL be
          passed in the order of appearance (given by the order of RTP
          sequence numbers) of timestamp values TS in the highest RTP
          session h associated with access units AU(TS).

            Informative Note: Due to packet loss not all NAL units
            present in all the RTP sessions may be associated with an
            timestamp value TS present in the highest RTP session h, in
            such a case an algorithm may
            a) proceed to the next complete access unit with NAL units
            present in all the received RTP sessions or
            b) may assign the value of session n, up to that session
            starting form session 0 no packet loss is present since the
            last received and erroneous access unit, to h_new and apply
            the process described above with h_new instead of h. The
            original value of h may be re-activated to be used with the
            process described above starting with a complete and error
            free access unit with NAL units present in all the
            originally received RTP sessions.

   Informative example:

   The example shown in Figure 4 refers to three RTP sessions A, B and C
   containing a multiplexed SVC bitstream.  In the example, the
   dependency signaling as described in 9.2.3. , indicates that Session
   A is the base RTP session, B is the first enhancement RTP session and
   depends on A, and C is the second RTP enhancement session and depends
   on A and B.  In the example, Session A has the lowest frame rate and
   Session B and C have the same, but a higher frame rate (using a
   hierarchical prediction structure).  Figure 2. shows an example for
   de-jitter buffering with different jitters present in the sessions,
   i.e. at buffering startup not all packets with the same timestamp are
   available in all the de-jittering buffers (see ,e.g., TS[4]).

   The process first proceeds to the NAL units associated with first
   timestamp TS[1] present in session C and removes/ignores all
   preceding NAL units to NAL units with TS[1] in each of the de-
   jittering buffers of RTP sessions A, B, and C.  Then starting from
   session C, the first timestamp available in decoding order (TS [1])


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 41]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   is selected and NAL units starting from RTP session A, and sessions B
   and C are placed in order of the RTP session dependency (in the
   example for TS[1]: session B -> C) into access unit AU(TS[1])
   associated with timestamp TS[1].  Then the next timestamp TS[3] in
   order of appearance in the highest RTP session C is processed and the
   process described above is repeated.  Note, that there may be access
   units with no NAL units present, e.g., in the lowest RTP session A
   (see, e.g., TS[1]).  With TS[8], the first access unit with NAL units
   present in all the RTP sessions appears in the buffers.

   Decoding order and dependency of NAL units per received RTP session
   with different jitter in sessions at buffering startup time:

   C: ------------(1,2)-(3,4)--(5)---(6)---(7,8)(9,10)-(11)--(12)----
        |     |     |     |     |     |      |    |     |      |
   B: -(1,2)-(3,4)-(5)---(6)--(7,8)-(9,10)-(11)-(12)--(13,14)(15,15)-
        |     |                 |     |                 |      |
   A: -------(1)---------------(2)---(3)---------------(4)----(5)----
   ------------------------------------------------------------------->
   TS: [4]   [2]   [1]   [3]   [8]   [6]   [5]   [7]   [12]   [10]


   Key:
   A, B, C                - RTP sessions
   Integer values in '()' - NAL unit decoding order per RTP session (y)
   '( )'                  - groups the NAL units of an access unit
                            in a RTP session
   '|'                    - indicates corresponding NAL units of the
                            same access unit AU(TS[..]) in the RTP
                            sessions
   Integer values in '[]' - media Timestamp (TS), sampling time as
                            derived from RTP timestamps associated to
                            the access unit AU(TS[..]).

            Figure 4  Example for session multiplexing with different
                           jitter in session at startup

8.1.1.1. Informative Algorithm for NI-T Decoding Order Recovery within
   an Access Unit

   Within an access unit, the [SVC] specification (specifically,
   sections 7.4.1.2.3 and G.7.4.1.2.3) constrains the valid decoding
   order of NAL units fairly tightly.  Due to these constraints, it is
   possible to reconstruct a valid decoding order for the NAL units of


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 42]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   an access unit based only on the order of NAL units in each session,
   the NAL unit headers, and Supplemental Enhancement Information
   message headers.

   This section specifies a non-normative algorithm to reconstruct a
   valid decoding order for NAL units within an access unit.  Other NAL
   unit orderings may also be valid; however, any compliant NAL unit
   ordering will describe the same video stream and ancillary data as
   the one produced by this algorithm.

   An actual implementation, of course, needs only to behave "as if"
   this reordering is done.  In particular, NAL units which are
   discarded by an implementation's decoding process do not need to
   first be reordered.

   In this algorithm, NAL units within an access unit are first ordered
   by NAL unit type, in the order specified in the list below (other
   than NAL unit type 14, which is handled specially as described).  NAL
   units of the same type are then ordered as specified for the type, if
   necessary.

   For the purposes of this algorithm, "session order" is the order of
   NAL units implied by an RTP session.  For the Non-Interleaved and
   single NAL unit modes, this is RTP sequence number order, and then
   the order of NAL units within an aggregation unit.

     o  9           Access unit delimiter

         Only one access unit delimiter will be present within an access
         unit.

     o  7           Sequence parameter set

         Any order of sequence parameter sets within an access unit is
         valid.

     o  13          Sequence parameter set extension

         Any order of sequence parameter set extensions within an access
         unit is valid.

     o  15          Subset sequence parameter set

         Any order of subset sequence parameter sets within an access
         unit is valid.

     o  8           Picture parameter set


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 43]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         Any order of picture parameter sets within an access unit is
         valid.

     o  6           Supplemental enhancement information (SEI)

         If an SEI message with a first payload of 0 (Buffering Period)
         is present, it must be the first SEI.

         If SEI messages with a Scalable Nesting (30) payload and a
         nested payload of 0 (Buffering Period) are present, these then
         follow.  Such an SEI message with the
         all_layer_representations_in_au_flag equal to 1 is placed
         first, followed by any others, sorted in DQId order by the
         highest DQId mentioned.

         All other SEI messages follow in any order.

     o  1           Coded slice of a non-IDR picture

     o  5           Coded slice of an IDR picture

     o  14          Prefix NAL unit in scalable extension

         NAL units of type 1 or 5 will be sent within only a single
         session for any given access unit. They are placed in session
         order.  (Note: Any given access unit will contain only NAL
         units of type 1 or type 5, not both.)

         If NAL units of type 14 are present, every NAL unit of type 1
         or 5 is prefixed by a NAL unit of type 14.  (Note: Within an
         access unit, every NAL unit of type 14 is identical, so
         correlation of type 14 NAL units with the other NAL units is
         not necessary.)

     o  12          Filler data

     o  14          Prefix NAL unit in scalable extension

         Any order of filler data units within an access unit is valid.

         If NAL units of type 14 are present, every filler data NAL unit
         is prefixed by a NAL unit of type 14.

     o  2           Coded slice data partition A

     o  3           Coded slice data partition B



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 44]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


     o  4           Coded slice data partition C

         These NAL units will be sent within only a single session for
         any given access unit, and are placed in session order.  (Note:
         No current SVC profile uses slice data partitioning.)



     o  19          Coded slice of an auxiliary coded picture without
        partitioning

        These NAL units will be sent within only a single session for
        any given access unit, and are placed in session order.

     o  16-18       Reserved

     o  21-23       Reserved

         These are placed immediately following the non-reserved-type
         VCL NAL unit they follow in session order.

     o  20          Coded slice in scalable extension

         These are placed in DQId order, based on the D and Q values in
         the slice's extended NAL unit header.  Within each DQId, they
         are placed in session order.  (Note: Extension slices with a
         given DQId value will be sent on a single session for any given
         access unit.)

     o  10          End of sequence

         Only one end of sequence will be present within an access unit.

     o  11          End of stream

         Only one end of stream will be present within an access unit.



8.1.2. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-C, NI-TC and I-C Modes

   The following process SHALL be used when the NI-C or I-C session-
   multiplexing packetization mode is in use.  The following process MAY
   be applied when the NI-TC session-multiplexing packetization mode is
   in use.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 45]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   The RTP packets output from the RTP-level reception processing for
   each session are placed into the de-session-multiplexing buffer.
   [Ed.Note(YkW): Add handling of some cases of packet losses when the
   NI-C or NI-TC mode is in use, that discards some received NAL units
   for which the CS-DON value cannot be derived.]

   It is RECOMMENDED to set the size of the de-session-multiplexing
   buffer, in terms of number of bytes, equal to or greater than the
   value of the sprop-desemul-buf-req media type parameter of the
   highest RTP session the receiver receives.

   The CS-DON value is calculated and stored for each NAL unit.

   The receiver operation is described below with the help of the
   following functions and constants:

   o  Function AbsDON is specified in Section 8.1 of RFC 3984.

   o  Function don_diff is specified in Section 5.5 of RFC 3984.

   o  Constant N is the value of the OPTIONAL sprop-session-
      multiplexing-depth media type parameter of the highest RTP session
      incremented by 1.

   Initial buffering lasts until one of the following conditions is
   fulfilled:

   o  There are N or more VCL NAL units in the de-session-multiplexing
      buffer.

   o  If sprop-semul-max-don-diff of the highest SVC RTP session is
      present, don_diff(m,n) is greater than the value of sprop-semul-
      max-don-diff of the highest RTP session, in which n corresponds to
      the NAL unit having the greatest value of AbsDON among the
      received NAL units and m corresponds to the NAL unit having the
      smallest value of AbsDON among the received NAL units.

   o  Initial buffering has lasted for the duration equal to or greater
      than the value of the OPTIONAL sprop-desemul-init-buf-time media
      type parameter of the highest SVC RTP session.

   The NAL units to be removed from the de-session-multiplexing buffer
   are determined as follows:






Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 46]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  If the de-session-multiplexing buffer contains at least N VCL NAL
      units, NAL units are removed from the de-session-multiplexing
      buffer and passed to the decoder in the order specified below
      until the buffer contains N-1 VCL NAL units.

   o  If sprop-semul-max-don-diff of the highest SVC RTP session is
      present, all NAL units m for which don_diff(m,n) is greater than
      sprop-max-don-diff of the highest RTP session are removed from the
      de-session-multiplexing buffer and passed to the decoder in the
      order specified below.  Herein, n corresponds to the NAL unit
      having the greatest value of AbsDON among the NAL units in the de-
      session-multiplexing buffer.

   The order in which NAL units are passed to the decoder is specified
   as follows:

   o  Let PDON be a variable that is initialized to 0 at the beginning
      of the RTP sessions.

   o  For each NAL unit associated with a value of CS-DON, a CS-DON
      distance is calculated as follows.  If the value of CS-DON of the
      NAL unit is larger than the value of PDON, the CS-DON distance is
      equal to CS-DON - PDON.  Otherwise, the CS-DON distance is equal
      to 65535 - PDON + CS-DON + 1.

   o  NAL units are delivered to the decoder in ascending order of CS-
      DON distance.  If several NAL units share the same value of CS-DON
      distance, they can be passed to the decoder in any order.

   o  When a desired number of NAL units have been passed to the
      decoder, the value of PDON is set to the value of CS-DON for the
      last NAL unit passed to the decoder.

9. Payload Format Parameters

   This section specifies the parameters that MAY be used to select
   optional features of the payload format and certain features of the
   bitstream.  The parameters are specified here as part of the media
   type registration for the SVC codec.  A mapping of the parameters
   into the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] is also
   provided for applications that use SDP.  Equivalent parameters could
   be defined elsewhere for use with control protocols that do not use
   SDP.

   Some parameters provide a receiver with the properties of the stream
   that will be sent.  The names of all these parameters start with
   "sprop" for stream properties.  Some of these "sprop" parameters are


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 47]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   limited by other payload or codec configuration parameters.  For
   example, the sprop-parameter-sets parameter is constrained by the
   profile-level-id parameter.  The media sender selects all "sprop"
   parameters rather than the receiver.  This uncommon characteristic of
   the "sprop" parameters may not be compatible with some signaling
   protocol concepts, in which case the use of these parameters SHOULD
   be avoided.

9.1. Media Type Registration

   The media subtype for the SVC codec is allocated from the IETF tree.

   The receiver MUST ignore any unspecified parameter.

      Informative note: Requiring that the receiver ignores unspecified
      parameters allows for backward compatibility of future
      extensions.  For example, if a future specification that is
      backward compatible to this specification specifies some new
      parameters, then a receiver according to this specification is
      capable of receiving data per the new payload but ignoring those
      parameters newly specified in the new payload specification.
      This provision is also present in RFC 3984.

   Media Type name:     video

   Media subtype name:  H264-SVC

   [Edt. Note: Text on "H264" must go into different section, see
   Colin's comments sent on 10 June 2008]The media subtype "H264" MUST
   be used for RTP streams using RFC 3984, i.e. not using any of the new
   features introduced by this specification compared to RFC 3984.
   [Edt. Note: The new features are to be listed herein.]  For RTP
   streams using any of the new features introduced by this
   specification compared to RFC 3984, the media subtype "H264-SVC"
   SHOULD be used, and the media subtype "H264" MAY be used.  Use of the
   media subtype "H264" for RTP streams using the new features allows
   for RFC 3984 receivers to negotiate and receive H.264/AVC or SVC
   streams packetized according to this specification, but to ignore
   media parameters and NAL unit types it does not recognize.

   Required parameters: none

   OPTIONAL parameters:

      profile-level-id:
         A base16 [RFC3548] (hexadecimal) representation of the
         following three bytes in the sequence parameter set NAL unit


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 48]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         specified in [SVC]: 1) profile_idc, 2) a byte herein referred
         to as profile-iop, composed of the values of
         constraint_set0_flag, constraint_set1_flag,
         constraint_set2_flag, constraint_set3_flag, and
         reserved_zero_4bits in bit-significance order, starting from
         the most significant bit, and 3) level_idc.  Note that
         reserved_zero_4bits is required to be equal to 0 in [SVC], but
         other values for it may be specified in the future by ITU-T or
         ISO/IEC.

         If the profile-level-id parameter is used to indicate
         properties of a NAL unit stream, it indicates the profile and
         level that a decoder has to support in order to comply with
         [SVC] when it decodes the NAL unit stream.  The profile-iop
         byte indicates whether the NAL unit stream also obeys all the
         constraints as specified in subsection G.7.4.2.1.1 of [SVC].
         Herein the NAL unit stream refers to the one consisting of all
         NAL units conveyed in the current RTP session, and all NAL
         units conveyed in other RTP sessions, if present, the current
         RTP session depends on.  The current RTP session MAY depend on
         other RTP sessions when a scalable bitstream is transported
         with more than one RTP session and the current session is not
         an independent RTP session.

         If the profile-level-id parameter is used for capability
         exchange or session setup procedure, it indicates the profile
         that the codec supports and the highest level supported for
         the signaled profile.  The profile-iop byte indicates whether
         the codec has additional limitations whereby only the common
         subset of the algorithmic features and limitations signaled
         with the profile-iop byte is supported by the codec.  For
         example, if a codec supports only the common subset of the
         coding tools of the Baseline profile and the Main profile at
         level 2.1 and below, the profile-level-id becomes 42E015, in
         which 42 stands for the Baseline profile, E0 indicates that
         only the common subset for all profiles is supported, and 15
         indicates level 2.1.

            Informative note: Capability exchange and session setup
            procedures should provide means to list the capabilities
            for each supported codec profile separately.  For example,
            the one-of-N codec selection procedure of the SDP
            Offer/Answer model can be used (section 10.2 of [RFC4566]).

         If no profile-level-id is present, the Baseline Profile
         without additional constraints at Level 1 MUST be implied.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 49]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      max-mbps, max-fs, max-cpb, max-dpb, and max-br:
         The common property of these parameters is as specified in RFC
         3984.

      max-mbps: This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      max-fs: This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      max-cpb: The value of max-cpb is an integer indicating the
         maximum coded picture buffer size in units of 1000 bits for
         the VCL HRD parameters (see A.3.1 item i or G.10.2.2 item g of
         [SVC]) and in units of 1200 bits for the NAL HRD parameters
         (see A.3.1 item j or G.10.2.2 item h of [SVC]).  The max-cpb
         parameter signals that the receiver has more memory than the
         minimum amount of coded picture buffer memory required by the
         signaled level conveyed in the value of the profile-level-id
         parameter.  When max-cpb is signaled, the receiver MUST be
         able to decode NAL unit streams that conform to the signaled
         level, with the exception that the MaxCPB value in Table A-1
         of [SVC] for the signaled level is replaced with the value of
         max-cpb.  The value of max-cpb MUST be greater than or equal
         to the value of MaxCPB for the level given in Table A-1 of
         [SVC].  Senders MAY use this knowledge to construct coded
         video streams with greater variation of bit rate than can be
         achieved with the MaxCPB value in Table A-1 of [SVC].

            Informative note: The coded picture buffer is used in the
            hypothetical reference decoder (Annex C) of [SVC].  The use
            of the hypothetical reference decoder is recommended in SVC
            encoders to verify that the produced bitstream conforms to
            the standard and to control the output bitrate.  Thus, the
            coded picture buffer is conceptually independent of any
            other potential buffers in the receiver, including de-
            interleaving and de-jitter buffers.  The coded picture
            buffer need not be implemented in decoders as specified in
            Annex C of [SVC], but rather standard-compliant decoders
            can have any buffering arrangements provided that they can
            decode standard-compliant bitstreams.  Thus, in practice,
            the input buffer for video decoder can be integrated with
            de-interleaving and de-jitter buffers of the receiver.

      max-dpb: This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      max-br: The value of max-br is an integer indicating the maximum
         video bit rate in units of 1000 bits per second for the VCL
         HRD parameters (see A.3.1 item i or G.10.2.2 item g of [SVC])



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 50]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         and in units of 1200 bits per second for the NAL HRD
         parameters (see A.3.1 item j or G.10.2.2 item h of [SVC]).

         The max-br parameter signals that the video decoder of the
         receiver is capable of decoding video at a higher bit rate
         than is required by the signaled level conveyed in the value
         of the profile-level-id parameter.

         When max-br is signaled, the video codec of the receiver MUST
         be able to decode NAL unit streams that conform to the
         signaled level, conveyed in the profile-level-id parameter,
         with the following exceptions in the limits specified by the
         level:

         o The value of max-br replaces the MaxBR value of the signaled
            level (in Table A-1 of [SVC]).

         o When the max-cpb parameter is not present, the result of the
            following formula replaces the value of MaxCPB in Table A-1
            of [SVC]: (MaxCPB of the signaled level) * max-br / (MaxBR
            of the signaled level).

         For example, if a receiver signals capability for Level 1.2
         with max-br equal to 1550, this indicates a maximum video
         bitrate of 1550 kbits/sec for VCL HRD parameters, a maximum
         video bitrate of 1860 kbits/sec for NAL HRD parameters, and a
         CPB size of 4036458 bits (1550000 / 384000 * 1000 * 1000).

         The value of max-br MUST be greater than or equal to the value
         MaxBR for the signaled level given in Table A-1 of [SVC].

         Senders MAY use this knowledge to send higher bitrate video as
         allowed in the level definition of SVC, to achieve improved
         video quality.

            Informative note: This parameter was added primarily to
            complement a similar codepoint in the ITU-T Recommendation
            H.245, so as to facilitate signaling gateway designs.  No
            assumption can be made from the value of this parameter
            that the network is capable of handling such bit rates at
            any given time.  In particular, no conclusion can be drawn
            that the signaled bit rate is possible under congestion
            control constraints.

      redundant-pic-cap:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 51]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      sprop-parameter-sets:
         This parameter MAY be used to convey any sequence parameter
         set, subset sequence parameter set and picture parameter set
         NAL units (herein referred to as the initial parameter set NAL
         units) that MUST be placed in the NAL unit stream to precede
         any other NAL units in decoding order by the receiver.  The
         parameter MUST NOT be used to indicate codec capability in any
         capability exchange procedure.  The value of the parameter is
         the base64 [RFC3548] representation of the initial parameter
         set NAL units as specified in sections 7.3.2.1, 7.3.2.2 and
         G.7.3.2.1 of [SVC].  The parameter sets are conveyed in
         decoding order, and no framing of the parameter set NAL units
         takes place.  A comma is used to separate any pair of
         parameter sets in the list.  Note that the number of bytes in
         a parameter set NAL unit is typically less than 10, but a
         picture parameter set NAL unit can contain several hundreds of
         bytes.

            Informative note: When several payload types are offered in
            the SDP Offer/Answer model, each with its own sprop-
            parameter-sets parameter, then the receiver cannot assume
            that those parameter sets do not use conflicting storage
            locations (i.e., identical values of parameter set
            identifiers).  Therefore, a receiver should double-buffer
            all sprop-parameter-sets and make them available to the
            decoder instance that decodes a certain payload type.

      parameter-add:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      packetization-mode:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      sprop-interleaving-depth:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      sprop-deint-buf-req:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      deint-buf-cap:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      sprop-init-buf-time:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      sprop-max-don-diff:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 52]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      max-rcmd-nalu-size:
         This parameter is as specified in RFC 3984.

      pmode:
         This parameter signals the properties of a NAL unit stream
         carried in more than one RTP session using session
         multiplexing or the capabilities of a receiver implementation.
         When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-T", the NI-T mode MUST
         be used.  When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-C", the NI-C
         mode MUST be used.  When the value of pmode is equal to "NI-
         TC" or pmode is not present, the NI-TC mode MUST be used.
         When the value of pmode is equal to "I-C", the I-C mode MUST
         be used.  The value of pmode MUST have one of the following
         tokens: "NI-T", "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".  This parameter
         MUST NOT be present, when "packetization-mode" is present.

      sprop-session-multiplexing-depth:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when the value of pmode is
         equal to "NI-T".  This parameter MUST be present when the
         value of pmode is equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C" or pmode
         is not present.

         This parameter signals the properties of a NAL unit stream
         carried in the current RTP session and the RTP sessions the
         current RTP session depends on.  It is guaranteed that
         receivers can reconstruct NAL unit decoding order as specified
         in Subsection 8.1.2.  of this memo when the de-session-
         multiplexing buffer size is at least the value of sprop-
         session-multiplexing-depth + 1 in terms of VCL NAL units.

         The value of sprop-session-multiplexing-depth MUST be an
         integer in the range of 0 to 32767, inclusive.

      sprop-desemul-buf-req:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when the value of pmode is
         equal to "NI-T".  It MUST be present when pmode is not present
         or the value of pmode is equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         sprop-desemul-buf-req signals the required size of the de-
         session-multiplexing buffer for the NAL unit stream carried in
         the current RTP session and the RTP sessions the current RTP
         session depends on.  It is guaranteed that receivers can
         recover the decoding order of the received NAL units from the
         current RTP session and the RTP sessions the current RTP
         session depends on as specified in section 8.1.2. , when the
         de-session-multiplexing buffer size is at least the value of
         sprop-desemul-buf-req in terms of bytes.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 53]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         The value of sprop-desemul-buf-req MUST be an integer in the
         range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

      desemul-buf-cap:
         This parameter signals the capabilities of a receiver
         implementation and indicates the amount of de-session-
         multiplexing buffer space in units of bytes that the receiver
         has available for recovering the NAL unit decoding order as
         specified in section 8.1.2. .  A receiver is able to handle
         any NAL unit stream for which the value of the sprop-desemul-
         buf-req parameter is smaller than or equal to this parameter.

         If the parameter is not present, then a value of 0 MUST be
         used for desemul-buf-cap.  The value of desemul-buf-cap MUST
         be an integer in the range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

      sprop-desemul-init-buf-time:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of a NAL
         unit stream carried in the current RTP session and the RTP
         sessions the current RTP session depends on.  The parameter
         MUST NOT be present if pmode is not present or the value of
         pmode is equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         The parameter signals the initial buffering time that a
         receiver MUST wait before starting to recover the NAL unit
         decoding order as specified in Subsection 8.1.2.  of this
         memo.

         The parameter is coded as a non-negative base10 integer
         representation in clock ticks of a 90-kHz clock.  If the
         parameter is not present, then no initial buffering time value
         is defined.  Otherwise the value of sprop-desemul-init-buf-
         time MUST be an integer in the range of 0 to 4294967295,
         inclusive.

      sprop-semul-max-don-diff:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of a NAL
         unit stream carried in the current RTP session and the RTP
         sessions the current RTP session depends on.  It MUST NOT be
         used to signal transmitter or receiver or codec capabilities.
         The parameter MUST NOT be present if the value of pmode is
         equal to "NI-T".  sprop-semul-max-don-diff is an integer in
         the range of 0 to 32767, inclusive.  If sprop-semul-max-don-
         diff is not present, the value of the parameter is
         unspecified.  sprop-semul-max-don-diff is calculated same as
         sprop-max-don-diff as specified in RFC 3984, with decoding



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 54]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         order number being replaced by cross-session decoding order
         number.

      sprop-prebuf-size:
         This parameter MAY be present when the current RTP session
         depends on any other RTP session.  This parameter MUST NOT be
         present when pmode is not present or the value of pmode is
         equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".  sprop-prebuf-size MAY
         signal the required size of the receiver buffer for the NAL
         unit stream per RTP session.  This parameter may be useful to
         compensate the impact of inter-RTP session jitter, when the
         receiver buffer size is at least the value of sprop-prebuf-
         size in terms of bytes.  Herein the NAL unit stream refers to
         the one consisting of all NAL units conveyed in the current
         RTP session.

         The value of sprop-prebuf-size MUST be an integer in the range
         of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

            Informative note: sprop-prebuf-size indicates the required
            size of the prebuffering receiver buffer only.  When
            network jitter can occur, an appropriately sized jitter
            buffer has to be provisioned for as well.  When a scalable
            bitstream is conveyed in more than one RTP session, and the
            sessions initiates at different time, the session
            initiation variation has also to be compensated by an
            appropriately sized buffer.

      sprop-prebuf-time:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of a NAL
         unit stream within a session multiplexing.  Herein the NAL
         unit stream refers to the one consisting of all NAL units
         conveyed in the current RTP session.  This parameter MUST NOT
         be present when pmode is not present or the value of pmode is
         equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         The parameter signals the initial buffering time used for a
         receiver before starting to recover the NAL unit decoding
         order for more than one RTP session. The parameter is the
         maximum value of (transmission time of a NAL unit - decoding
         time of the NAL unit), assuming reliable and instantaneous
         transmission, the same timeline for transmission and decoding,
         and that decoding starts when the first packet arrives.

         The parameter is coded as a non-negative base10 integer
         representation in clock ticks of a 90-kHz clock.  If the
         parameter is not present, then no initial buffering time value


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 55]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         is defined.  Otherwise the value of sprop-prebuf-time MUST be
         an integer in the range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

         In addition to the signaled sprop-prebuf-time, receivers
         SHOULD take into account the transmission delay jitter
         buffering, including buffering for the delay jitter caused by
         mixers, translators, gateways, proxies, traffic-shapers, and
         other network elements.  Yet another aspect receivers SHOULD
         take into account is the session initiation variation when a
         scalable bitstream is conveyed in more than one session,
         including buffering the variation.

         [Ed.Note(YkW): Need to discuss how inter-RTP session jitter
         should be handled in general, and how it works by using sprop-
         prebuf-size and sprop-prebuf-time.]

      sprop-scalability-info:
         This parameter MAY be used to convey the NAL unit containing
         the scalability information SEI message as specified in Annex
         G of [SVC].  This parameter MAY be used to signal the
         contained Layers of an SVC bitstream.  The parameter MUST NOT
         be used to indicate codec capability in any capability
         exchange procedure.  The value of the parameter is the base64
         representation of the NAL unit containing the scalability
         information SEI message.  If present, the NAL unit MUST
         contain only a scalability information SEI message.

         This parameter MAY be used in an offering or declarative SDP
         message to indicate what Layers can be provided.  A receiver
         MAY indicate its choice of one Layer using the optional media
         type parameter scalable-layer-id.

      sprop-layer-range:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal two sets of the layer
         identification values of the lowest and highest operation
         points conveyed in the RTP session.  Each set is a base16
         representation of a three-character value, with the first
         character representing DID, the second character representing
         QID, and the third character representing TID.  The two sets
         are comma separated.  Let DIDl and DIDh be the least DID value
         and the greatest DID value, respectively, among all the NAL
         units conveyed in the RTP session. Let QIDl and TIDl be the
         least QID value and the least TID value, respectively, among
         all the NAL units that are conveyed in the RTP session and
         that have DID equal to DIDl. Let QIDh and TIDh be the greatest
         QID value and the great TID value, respectively, among all the
         NAL units that are conveyed in the RTP session and that have


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 56]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         DID equal to DIDh.  The first set indicates the DID, QID and
         TID values of the lowest operation point, for which the DID,
         QID and TID values are equal to DIDl, QIDl, and TIDl,
         respectively.  The second set indicates the DID, QID and TID
         values of the highest operation point, for which the DID, QID
         and TID values are equal to DIDh, QIDh, and TIDh,
         respectively.

      scalable-layer-id:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal a receiver's choice of
         the offers or declared operation points or layers using sprop-
         scalability-info.  The value of scalable-layer-id is a base16
         representation of the layer_id[ i ] syntax element in the
         scalability information SEI message as specified in [SVC].

         [Edt. Note (TS): That is, a SDP capable receiver/middle-box
         must decode the sprop-scalabiltiy-info syntax, which is not
         specified in this memo, to select a scalable-layer-id. This is
         currently not addressed in the offer answer section!]

      sprop-spatial-resolution:
         [Edt. Note: I know that framerate and bitrate SDP parameters
         are already available, but failed to find a spatial resolution
         SDP parameter. It would be good if this is already defined.
         Otherwise, it would be better to be defined somewhere else
         because it is a generic parameter.]

         This parameter MAY be used to indicate the property of a
         stream or the capability of a receiver or sender
         implementation.  The value is a base16 of the width and height
         of the spatial resolution, in pixels, separated by a comma.

         [Edt. Note (TS): Shouldn't this be a generic SDP parameter?]

      Encoding considerations:
         This type is only defined for transfer via RTP (RFC 3550).

      Security considerations:
         See section 10.  of RFC XXXX.

      Public specification:
         Please refer to RFC XXXX and its section 14. .

      Additional information:
         None

      File extensions:     none


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 57]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      Macintosh file type code: none

      Object identifier or OID: none

      Person & email address to contact for further information:

      Intended usage:      COMMON

      Author:

      Change controller:
         IETF Audio/Video Transport working group delegated from the
         IESG.

9.2. SDP Parameters

   [Edt. Note: For agreeing on a Layer or OP in unicast, an SDP can
   contain multiple m lines with bitrate, framerate and spatial
   resolution parameters available, in addition to sprop-scalability-
   info. The receive can select one of the m lines, or, for operation
   points that are not included in the m lines, one of the "scalable
   layers" specified by sprop-scalabiltiy-info using scalable-layer-id.

   For layered multicast, then the grouping signaling in I-D.ietf-
   mmusic-decoding-dependency is needed.

   The above would conveniently support also the normal ROI use cases
   (with a few ROIs each indicated as a "scalable layer") but not the
   interactive ROI use cases.  The quality layer using priority_id use
   cases are not supported either. That would need one more optional
   media type parameter, to identify a quality layer.  The lightweight
   transcoding use cases should be supported well by using (multiple)
   normal AVC SDP offering messages.]

9.2.1. Mapping of Payload Type Parameters to SDP

   The media type video/H264-SVC string is mapped to fields in the
   Session Description Protocol (SDP) as follows:

   o  The media name in the "m=" line of SDP MUST be video.

   o  The encoding name in the "a=rtpmap" line of SDP MUST be H264-SVC
      (the media subtype).

   o  The clock rate in the "a=rtpmap" line MUST be 90000.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 58]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The OPTIONAL parameters "profile-level-id", "max-mbps", "max-fs",
      "max-cpb", "max-dpb", "max-br", "redundant-pic-cap", "sprop-
      parameter-sets", "parameter-add", "packetization-mode", "sprop-
      interleaving-depth", "deint-buf-cap", "sprop-deint-buf-req",
      "sprop-init-buf-time", "sprop-max-don-diff", "max-rcmd-nalu-size",
      "pmode", "sprop-session-multiplexing-depth", "sprop-desemul-buf-
      req", "desemul-buf-cap", "sprop-desemul-init-buf-time", "sprop-
      semul-max-don-diff", "sprop-prebuf-size", "sprop-prebuf-time",
      "sprop-layer-range", "sprop-scalability-info", "scalable-layer-
      id", and "sprop-spatial-resolution", when present, MUST be
      included in the "a=fmtp" line of SDP.  These parameters are
      expressed as a media type string, in the form of a semicolon
      separated list of parameter=value pairs.

9.2.2. Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model

   When H.264 or SVC is offered over RTP using SDP in an Offer/Answer
   model [RFC3264] for negotiation for unicast usage, the following
   limitations and rules apply:

   o  The parameters identifying a media format configuration for H.264
      or SVC are "profile-level-id", "packetization-mode", and, if
      required by "packetization-mode", "sprop-deint-buf-req".  These
      three parameters MUST be used symmetrically; i.e., the answerer
      MUST either maintain all configuration parameters or remove the
      media format (payload type) completely, if one or more of the
      parameter values are not supported.

         Informative note: The requirement for symmetric use applies
         only for the above three parameters and not for the other
         stream properties and capability parameters.

      To simplify handling and matching of these configurations, the
      same RTP payload type number used in the offer SHOULD also be
      used in the answer, as specified in [RFC3264].  An answer MUST
      NOT contain a payload type number used in the offer unless the
      configuration ("profile-level-id", "packetization-mode", and, if
      present, "sprop-deint-buf-req") is the same as in the offer.

         Informative note: An offerer, when receiving the answer, has
         to compare payload types not declared in the offer based on
         media type (i.e., video/H264-SVC) and the above three
         parameters with any payload types it has already declared, in
         order to determine whether the configuration in question is
         new or equivalent to a configuration already offered.




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 59]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      An answerer MAY select from the layers offered in the "sprop-
      scalability-information" parameter by including "scalable-layer-
      id" or "sprop-layer-range" in the answer.[Edt. Note: do we need
      to additionally define behavior with snd/rcvonly parameter?]

   o  The parameters "sprop-parameter-sets", "sprop-deint-buf-req",
      "sprop-interleaving-depth", "sprop-max-don-diff", "sprop-init-buf-
      time", "sprop-prebuf-size", "sprop-prebuf-time", "sprop-
      scalability-information", "sprop-layer-range" describe the
      properties of the NAL unit stream that the offerer or answerer is
      sending for this media format configuration.  This differs from
      the normal usage of the Offer/Answer parameters: normally such
      parameters declare the properties of the stream that the offerer
      or the answerer is able to receive.  When dealing with H.264 or
      SVC, the offerer assumes that the answerer will be able to receive
      media encoded using the configuration being offered.

         Informative note: The above parameters apply for any stream
         sent by the declaring entity with the same configuration;
         i.e., they are dependent on their source.  Rather then being
         bound to the payload type, the values may have to be applied
         to another payload type when being sent, as they apply for the
         configuration.

   o  The capability parameters ("max-mbps", "max-fs", "max-cpb",
      "max-dpb", "max-br", ,"redundant-pic-cap", "max-rcmd-nalu-size")
      MAY be used to declare further capabilities.  Their interpretation
      depends on the direction attribute.  When the direction attribute
      is sendonly, then the parameters describe the limits of the RTP
      packets and the NAL unit stream that the sender is capable of
      producing.  When the direction attribute is sendrecv or recvonly,
      then the parameters describe the limitations of what the receiver
      accepts.

   o  As specified above, an offerer has to include the size of the
      deinterleaving buffer in the offer for an interleaved H.264 or SVC
      stream.  To enable the offerer and answerer to inform each other
      about their capabilities for deinterleaving buffering, both
      parties are RECOMMENDED to include "deint-buf-cap".  This
      information MAY be used when the value for "sprop-deint-buf-req"
      is selected in a second round of offer and answer.  For
      interleaved streams, it is also RECOMMENDED to consider offering
      multiple payload types with different buffering requirements when
      the capabilities of the receiver are unknown.





Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 60]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  The "sprop-parameter-sets" parameter is used as described above.
      In addition, an answerer MUST maintain all parameter sets received
      in the offer in its answer.  Depending on the value of the
      "parameter-add" parameter, different rules apply: If "parameter-
      add" is false (0), the answer MUST NOT add any additional
      parameter sets.  If "parameter-add" is true (1), the answerer, in
      its answer, MAY add additional parameter sets to the "sprop-
      parameter-sets" parameter.  The answerer MUST also, independent of
      the value of "parameter-add", accept to receive a video stream
      using the sprop-parameter-sets it declared in the answer.

         Informative note: care must be taken when parameter sets are
         added not to cause overwriting of already transmitted
         parameter sets by using conflicting parameter set identifiers.

   For streams being delivered over multicast, the following rules apply
   in addition:

   o  The stream properties parameters ("sprop-parameter-sets", "sprop-
      deint-buf-req", "sprop-interleaving-depth", "sprop-max-don-diff",
      "sprop-init-buf-time", "sprop-prebuf-size", "sprop-prebuf-time",
      "sprop-scalability-information", and "sprop-layer-range") MUST NOT
      be changed by the answerer.  Thus, a payload type can either be
      accepted unaltered or removed.

   o  The receiver capability parameters "max-mbps", "max-fs", "max-
      cpb", "max-dpb", "max-br", and "max-rcmd-nalu-size" MUST be
      supported by the answerer for all streams declared as sendrecv or
      recvonly; otherwise, one of the following actions MUST be
      performed: the media format is removed, or the session rejected.

   o  The receiver capability parameter redundant-pic-cap SHOULD be
      supported by the answerer for all streams declared as sendrecv or
      recvonly as follows:  The answerer SHOULD NOT include redundant
      coded pictures in the transmitted stream if the offerer indicated
      redundant-pic-cap equal to 0.  Otherwise (when redundant_pic_cap
      is equal to 1), it is beyond the scope of this memo to recommend
      how the answerer should use redundant coded pictures.

   Below are the complete lists of how the different parameters shall be
   interpreted in the different combinations of offer or answer and
   direction attribute.

   o  In offers and answers for which "a=sendrecv" or no direction
      attribute is used, or in offers and answers for which "a=recvonly"
      is used, the following interpretation of the parameters MUST be
      used.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 61]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      Declaring actual configuration or properties for receiving:

         - profile-level-id
         - packetization-mode

      Declaring actual properties of the stream to be sent (applicable
      only when "a=sendrecv" or no direction attribute is used):

         - sprop-deint-buf-req
         - sprop-interleaving-depth
         - sprop-parameter-sets
         - sprop-max-don-diff
         - sprop-init-buf-time
         - sprop-prebuf-size
         - sprop-prebuf-time
         - sprop-scalability-information
         - sprop-layer-range
         - scalable-layer-id

      Declaring receiver implementation capabilities:

         - max-mbps
         - max-fs
         - max-cpb
         - max-dpb
         - max-br
         - redundant-pic-cap
         - deint-buf-cap
         - max-rcmd-nalu-size

      Declaring how Offer/Answer negotiation shall be performed:

         - parameter-add

   o  In an offer or answer for which the direction attribute
      "a=sendonly" is included for the media stream, the following
      interpretation of the parameters MUST be used:

      Declaring actual configuration and properties of stream proposed
      to be sent:

         - profile-level-id
         - packetization-mode
         - sprop-deint-buf-req
         - sprop-max-don-diff
         - sprop-init-buf-time
         - sprop-parameter-sets


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 62]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


         - sprop-interleaving-depth
         - sprop-prebuf-size
         - sprop-prebuf-time
         - sprop-scalability-information
         - sprop-layer-range
         - sprop-spatial-resoltuion

      Declaring how Offer/Answer negotiation shall be performed:

         - parameter-add

   Furthermore, the following considerations are necessary:

   o  Parameters used for declaring receiver capabilities are in general
      downgradable; i.e., they express the upper limit for a sender's
      possible behavior.  Thus a sender MAY select to set its encoder
      using only lower/lesser or equal values of these parameters.
      "sprop-parameter-sets" MUST NOT be used in a sender's declaration
      of its capabilities, as the limits of the values that are carried
      inside the parameter sets are implicit with the profile and level
      used.

   o  Parameters declaring a configuration point are not downgradable,
      with the exception of the level part of the "profile-level-id"
      parameter.  This expresses values a receiver expects to be used
      and must be used verbatim on the sender side.

   o  When a sender's capabilities are declared, and non-downgradable
      parameters are used in this declaration, then these parameters
      express a configuration that is acceptable.  In order to achieve
      high interoperability levels, it is often advisable to offer
      multiple alternative configurations; e.g., for the packetization
      mode.  It is impossible to offer multiple configurations in a
      single payload type.  Thus, when multiple configuration offers are
      made, each offer requires its own RTP payload type associated with
      the offer.

   o  A receiver SHOULD understand all MIME parameters, even if it only
      supports a subset of the payload format's functionality.  This
      ensures that a receiver is capable of understanding when an offer
      to receive media can be downgraded to what is supported by
      receiver of the offer.







Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 63]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o  An answerer MAY extend the offer with additional media format
      configurations.  However, to enable their usage, in most cases a
      second offer is required from the offerer to provide the stream
      properties parameters that the media sender will use.  This also
      has the effect that the offerer has to be able to receive this
      media format configuration, not only to send it.

   o  If an offerer wishes to have non-symmetric capabilities between
      sending and receiving, the offerer has to offer different RTP
      sessions; i.e., different media lines declared as "recvonly" and
      "sendonly", respectively.  This may have further implications on
      the system.

9.2.3. Usage with Session Multiplexing

   If Session multiplexing is used, the rules on signaling media
   decoding dependency in SDP as defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-
   dependency] apply.

9.2.4. Usage in Declarative Session Descriptions

   When H.264 or SVC over RTP is offered with SDP in a declarative
   style, as in RTSP [RFC2326] or SAP [RFC2974], the following
   considerations are necessary.

   o  All parameters capable of indicating the properties of both a NAL
      unit stream and a receiver are used to indicate the properties of
      a NAL unit stream.  For example, in this case, the parameter
      "profile-level-id" declares the values used by the stream, instead
      of the capabilities of the sender.  This results in that the
      following interpretation of the parameters MUST be used:

      Declaring actual configuration or properties:

         - profile-level-id
         - sprop-parameter-sets
         - packetization-mode
         - sprop-interleaving-depth
         - sprop-deint-buf-req
         - sprop-max-don-diff
         - sprop-init-buf-time
         - sprop-prebuf-size
         - sprop-prebuf-time
         - sprop-layer-range
         - sprop-spatial-resolution
         - sprop-scalability-info



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 64]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      Not usable:

         - max-mbps
         - max-fs
         - max-cpb
         - max-dpb
         - max-br
         - redundant-pic-cap
         - max-rcmd-nalu-size
         - parameter-add
         - deint-buf-cap
         - scalable_layer_id

   o  A receiver of the SDP is required to support all parameters and
      values of the parameters provided; otherwise, the receiver MUST
      reject (RTSP) or not participate in (SAP) the session.  It falls
      on the creator of the session to use values that are expected to
      be supported by the receiving application.

9.3. Examples

9.3.1. Example for Offering A Single SVC Session

      Offerer -> Answerer SDP message:

      v=0
      o=jdoe 2890844526 2890842807 IN IP4 192.0.2.12
      s=SVC SDP example
      i=SVC Scalable Video Coding session
      t=2873397496 2873404696
      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 96 97 98
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4d400a; packetization-mode=1;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,aP4Eag==;
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=rtpmap:98 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:98 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=2;
      init-buf-time=156320;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;

9.3.2. Example for Offering Session Multiplexing

      Offerer -> Answerer SDP message:


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 65]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      v=0
      o=jdoe 2890844526 2890842807 IN IP4 192.0.2.12
      s=SVC Scalable Video Coding session
      i=SDP is an Offer for a session offered by a transcoding entity
      t=2873397496 2873404696
      a=group:DDP 1 2 3
      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 96 97 98
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4d400a; packetization-mode=0;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,aP4Eag==;
      a=rtpmap:97 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=rtpmap:98 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:98 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=2;
      init-buf-time=156320;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=mid:1
      m=video 20002 RTP/AVP 99 100
      a=rtpmap:99 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:99 profile-level-id=53000c; pmode=NI-T;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=rtpmap:100 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:100 profile-level-id=53000c; pmode=I-C;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=mid:2
      a=depend:99 lay 1:96,97; 100 lay 1:98
      m=video 20004 RTP/AVP 101
      a=rtpmap:101 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:101 profile-level-id=53000c; pmode=NI-TC;
      sprop-parameter-sets=Z01ACprLFicg,Z1MADEsA1NZYWCWQ,aP4Eag==,aEvgR
      qA=,aGvgRiA=;
      a=mid:3
      a=depend:101 lay 1:96,97 2:99

9.4. Parameter Set Considerations

   Please see section 8.4 of [RFC3984].

10. Security Considerations

   Section 9 of [RFC3984] applies.  Additionally, the following applies.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 66]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   Decoders MUST exercise caution with respect to the handling of
   reserved NAL unit types and reserved SEI messages, particularly if
   they contain active elements, and MUST restrict their domain of
   applicability to the presentation containing the stream.  The safest
   way is to simply discard these NAL units and SEI messages.

   When integrity protection is applied, care MUST be taken that the
   stream being transported may be scalable; hence a receiver may be
   able to access only part of the entire stream.

      Informative note: Other security aspects, including
      confidentiality, authentication, and denial-of-service threat,
      for SVC are similar as H.264/AVC, as discussed in section 9 of
      [RFC3984].

11. Congestion Control

   Within any given RTP session carrying payload according to this
   specification, the provisions of section 12 of [RFC3984] apply.
   Reducing the session bandwidth is possible by one or more of the
   following means, listed in an order that, in most cases, will assure
   the least negative impact to the user experience:

   a) within the highest Layer identified by the DID field, utilize the
     TID and/or QID fields in the NAL unit header to drop NAL units
     with lower importance for the decoding process or human
     perception.

   b) drop all NAL units belonging to the highest enhancement Layer as
     identified by the highest DID value.

   c) dropping NAL units according to their importance for the decoding
     process, as indicated by the fields in the NAL unit header of the
     NAL units or in the prefix NAL units.

   d) dropping NAL units or entire packets not according to the
     aforementioned rules (media-unaware stream thinning).  This
     results in the reception of a non-compliant bitstream and, most
     likely, in very annoying artifacts

      Informative note: The discussion above is centered on NAL units
      and not on packets, primarily because that is the level where
      senders can meaningfully manipulate the scalable bitstream.  The
      mapping of NAL units to RTP packets is fairly flexible when using
      aggregation packets.  Depending on the nature of the congestion
      control algorithm, the "dimension" of congestion measurement



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 67]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


      (packet count or bitrate) and reaction to it (reducing packet
      count or bitrate or both) can be adjusted accordingly.

   All aforementioned means are available to the RTP sender, regardless
   whether that sender is located in the sending endpoint or in a mixer
   based MANE.

   When a translator-based MANE is employed, then the MANE MAY
   manipulate the session only on the MANE's outgoing path, so that the
   sensed end-to-end congestion falls within the permissible envelope.
   As all translators, in this case the MANE needs to rewrite RTCP RRs
   to reflect the manipulations it has performed on the session.

      Informative note: Applications MAY also implement, in addition or
      separately, other congestion control mechanisms, e.g. as
      described in [RFC3450] and [Yan].

12. IANA Consideration

   [Edt. Note: A new media type should be registered from IANA.]

13. Informative Appendix: Application Examples

13.1. Introduction

   Scalable video coding is a concept that has been around at least
   since MPEG-2 [MPEG2], which goes back as early as 1993.
   Nevertheless, it has never gained wide acceptance; perhaps partly
   because applications didn't materialize in the form envisioned during
   standardization.

   ISO/IEC MPEG and ITU-T VCEG, respectively, performed a requirement
   analysis for the SVC project.  Dozens of scenarios have been studied.
   While some of the scenarios appear not to follow the most basic
   design principles of the Internet, e.g. as discussed in section 13.5.
   , -- and are therefore not appropriate for IETF standardization --
   others are clearly in the scope of IETF work.  Of these, this draft
   chooses the following subset for immediate consideration.  The MPEG
   and VCEG requirement documents are available in [JVT-N026] and [JVT-
   N027], respectively.

   With these remarks, we now introduce three main application scenarios
   that we consider as relevant, and that are implementable with this
   specification.





Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 68]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


13.2. Layered Multicast

   This well-understood form of the use of layered coding [McCanne]
   implies that all layers are individually conveyed in their own RTP
   packet streams, each carried in its own RTP session using the IP
   (multicast) address and port number as the single demultiplexing
   point.  Receivers "tune" into the layers by subscribing to the IP
   multicast, normally by using IGMP [IGMP].  Depending on the
   application scenario, it is also possible to convey a number of
   layers in one RTP session, when finer operation points within the
   subset of layers are not needed.

   Layered multicast has the great advantage of simplicity and easy
   implementation.  However, it has also the great disadvantage of
   utilizing many different transport addresses.  While we consider this
   not to be a major problem for a professionally maintained content
   server, receiving client endpoints need to open many ports to IP
   multicast addresses in their firewalls.  This is a practical problem
   from a firewall and network address translation (NAT) viewpoint.
   Furthermore, even today IP multicast is not as widely deployed as
   many wish.

   We consider layered multicast an important application scenario for
   the following reasons.  First, it is well understood and the
   implementation constraints are well known.  Second, there may well be
   large scale IP networks outside the immediate Internet context that
   may wish to employ layered multicast in the future.  One possible
   example could be a combination of content creation and core-network
   distribution for the various mobile TV services, e.g. those being
   developed by 3GPP (MBMS) [MBMS] and DVB (DVB-H) [DVB-H].

13.3. Streaming of an SVC Scalable Stream

   In this scenario, a streaming server has a repository of stored SVC
   coded layers for a given content.  At the time of streaming, and
   according to the capabilities, connectivity, and congestion situation
   of the client(s), the streaming server generates and serves a
   scalable stream.  Both unicast and multicast serving is possible.  At
   the same time, the streaming server may use the same repository of
   stored layers to compose different streams (with a different set of
   layers) intended for other audiences.

   As every endpoint receives only a single SVC RTP session, the number
   of firewall pinholes can be optimized to one.

   The main difference between this scenario and straightforward
   simulcasting lies in the architecture and the requirements of the


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 69]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   streaming server, and is therefore out of the scope of IETF
   standardization.  However, compelling arguments can be made why such
   a streaming server design makes sense.  One possible argument is
   related to storage space and channel bandwidth.  Another is bandwidth
   adaptability without transcoding -- a considerable advantage in a
   congestion controlled network.  When the streaming server learns
   about congestion, it can reduce sending bitrate by choosing fewer
   layers, when composing the layered stream; see section 11. .  SVC is
   designed to gracefully support both bandwidth rampdown and bandwidth
   rampup with a considerable dynamic range.  This payload format is
   designed to allow for bandwidth flexibility in the mentioned sense.
   While, in theory, a transcoding step could achieve a similar dynamic
   range, the computational demands are impractically high and video
   quality is typically lowered -- therefore, few (if any) streaming
   servers implement full transcoding.

13.4. Multicast to MANE, SVC Scalable Stream to Endpoint

   This scenario is a bit more complex, and designed to optimize the
   network traffic in a core network, while still requiring only a
   single pinhole in the endpoint's firewall.  One of its key
   applications is the mobile TV market.

   Consider a large private IP network, e.g. the core network of 3GPP.
   Streaming servers within this core network can be assumed to be
   professionally maintained.  We assume that these servers can have
   many ports open to the network and that layered multicast is a real
   option.  Therefore, we assume that the streaming server multicasts
   SVC scalable layers, instead of simulcasting different
   representations of the same content at different bit rates.

   Also consider many endpoints of different classes.  Some of these
   endpoints may not have the processing power or the display size to
   meaningfully decode all layers; others may have these capabilities.
   Users of some endpoints may not wish to pay for high quality and are
   happy with a base service, which may be cheaper or even free.  Other
   users are willing to pay for high quality.  Finally, some connected
   users may have a bandwidth problem in that they can't receive the
   bandwidth they would want to receive -- be it through congestion,
   connectivity, change of service quality, or for whatever other
   reasons.  However, all these users have in common that they don't
   want to be exposed too much, and therefore the number of firewall
   pinholes need to be small.

   This situation can be handled best by introducing middleboxes close
   to the edge of the core network, which receive the layered multicast
   streams and compose the single SVC scalable bit stream according to


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 70]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   the needs of the endpoint connected.  These middleboxes are called
   MANEs throughout this specification.  In practice, we envision the
   MANE to be part of (or at least physically and topologically close
   to) the base station of a mobile network, where all the signaling and
   media traffic necessarily are multiplexed on the same physical link.
   This is why we do not worry too much about decomposition aspects of
   the MANE as such.

   MANEs necessarily need to be fairly complex devices.  They certainly
   need to understand the signaling, so, for example, to associate the
   PT octet in the RTP header with the SVC payload type.

   A MANE may aggregate multiple RTP streams, possibly from multiple RTP
   sessions, thus to reduce the number of firewall pinholes required at
   the endpoints. This type of MANEs is conceptually easy to implement
   and can offer powerful features, primarily because it necessarily can
   "see" the payload (including the RTP payload headers), utilize the
   wealth of layering information available therein, and manipulate it.

   While such an MANE operation in its most trivial form (combining
   multiple RTP packet streams into a single one) can be implemented
   comparatively simply -- reordering the incoming packets according to
   the DON and sending them in the appropriate order -- more complex
   forms can also be envisioned.  For example, a MANE can be optimizing
   the outgoing RTP stream to the MTU size of the outgoing path by
   utilizing the aggregation and fragmentation mechanisms of this memo.

   A MANE can also perform stream thinning, so to adhere to congestion
   control principles as discussed in section 11. .  While the
   implementation of the forward (media) channel of such a MANE appears
   to be comparatively simple, the need to rewrite RTCP RRs makes even
   such a MANE a complex device.

   While the implementation complexity of either case of a MANE, as
   discussed above, is fairly high, the computational demands are
   comparatively low.  In particular, SVC and/or this specification
   contain means to easily generate the correct inter-layer decoding
   order of NAL units.  No serious bit-oriented processing is required
   and no significant state information (beyond that of the signaling
   and perhaps the SVC sequence parameter sets) need to be kept.

13.5. Scenarios Currently Not Considered

   Remarks have been made that the current draft does not take into
   consideration at least one application scenario which some JVT folks
   considered important.  In particular, their idea was to make the RTP
   payload format (or the media stream itself) self-contained enough


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 71]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   that a stateless, non-signaling-aware device can "thin" an RTP
   session to meet the bandwidth demands of the endpoint.  They called
   this device a "Router" or "Gateway", and sometimes a MANE.
   Obviously, it's not a Router or Gateway in the IETF sense.  To
   distinguish it from a MANE as defined in RFC 3984 and in this
   specification, let's call it an MDfH (Magic Device from Heaven).

   To simplify discussions, let's assume point-to-point traffic only.
   The endpoint has a signaling relationship with the streaming server,
   but it is known that the MDfH is somewhere in the media path (e.g.
   because the physical network topology ensures this).  It has been
   requested, at least implicitly through MPEG's and JVT's requirements
   document, that the MDfH should be capable to intercept the SVC
   scalable bit stream, modify it by dropping packets or parts thereof,
   and forwarding the resulting packet stream to the receiving endpoint.
   It has been requested that this payload specification contains
   protocol elements facilitating such an operation, and the argument
   has been made that the NRI field of RFC 3984 serves exactly the same
   purpose.

   The authors of this I-D do not consider the scenario above to be
   aligned with the most basic design philosophies the IETF follows, and
   therefore have not addressed the comments made (except through this
   section).  In particular, we see the following problems with the MDfH
   approach):

   o As the very minimum, the MDfH would need to know which RTP streams
     are carrying SVC.  We don't see how this could be accomplished but
     by using a static payload type.  None of the IETF defined RTP
     profiles envision static payload types for SVC, and even the de-
     facto profiles developed by some application standard
     organizations (3GPP for example) do not use this outdated concept.
     Therefore, the MDfH necessarily needs to be at least "listening"
     to the signaling.

   o If the RTP packet payload were encrypted, it would be impossible
     to interpret the payload header and/or the first bytes of the
     media stream.  We understand that there are crypto schemes under
     discussion that encrypt only the last n bytes of an RTP payload,
     but we are more than unsure that this is fully in line with the
     IETF's security vision.

   Even if the above two problems would have been overcome through
   standardization outside of the IETF, we still foresee serious design
   flaws:




Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 72]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   o An MDfH can't simply dump RTP packets it doesn't want to forward.
     It either needs to act as a full RTP Translator (implying that it
     rewrites RTCP RRs and such), or it needs to patch the RTP sequence
     numbers to fulfill the RTP specification.  Not doing either would,
     for the receiver, look like the gaps in the sequence numbers
     occurred due to unintentional erasures, which has interesting
     effects on congestion control (if implemented), will break pretty
     much every meta-payload ever developed, and so on.  (Many more
     points could be made here).

   In summary, based on our current knowledge we are not willing to
   specify protocol mechanisms that support an operation point that has
   so little in common with classic RTP use.

13.6. SSRC Multiplexing

   The authors have played with the idea of introducing SSRC
   multiplexing, i.e. allowing sending multiple RTP packet streams
   containing layers in the same RTP session, differentiated by SSRC
   values.  Our intention was to minimize the number of firewall
   pinholes in an endpoint to one, by using MANEs to aggregate multiple
   outgoing sessions stemming from a server into a single session (with
   SSRC multiplexed packet streams).  We were hoping that would be
   feasible even with encrypted packets in an SRTP context.

   While an implementation along these lines indeed appears to be
   feasible for the forward media path, the RTCP RR rewrite cannot be
   implemented in the way necessary for this scheme to work.  This
   relates to the need to authenticate the RTCP RRs as per SRTP
   [RFC3711].  While the RTCP RR itself does not need to be rewritten by
   the scheme we envisioned, its transport addresses needs to be
   manipulated.  This, in turn, is incompatible with the mandatory
   authentication of RTCP RRs.  As a result, there would be a
   requirement that a MANE needs to be in the RTCP security context of
   the sessions, which was not envisioned in our use case.

   As the envisioned use case cannot be implemented, we refrained to add
   the considerable document complexity to support SSRC multiplexing
   herein.

14. References

14.1. Normative References

   [H.264]   ITU-T Recommendation H.264, "Advanced video coding for
             generic audiovisual services", Version 4, July 2005.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 73]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-decoding-dependency]  Schierl, T., and Wenger, S.,
             "Signaling media decoding dependency in Session Description
             Protocol (SDP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-decoding-dependency-02
             (work in progress), May 2008.

   [MPEG4-10] ISO/IEC International Standard 14496-10:2005.

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
             With Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June
             2002.

   [RFC3548] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
             Encodings", RFC 3548, July 2003.

   [RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and Jacobson,
             V., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications",
             STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.

   [RFC3984] Wenger, S., Hannuksela, M., Stockhammer, T., Westerlund,M.,
             and Singer, D., "RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video", RFC
             3984, February 2005.

   [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and Perkins, C., "SDP: Session
             Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.

   [SVC]     Joint Video Team, "Joint Draft 11 of SVC Amendment",
             available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-
             site/2007_06_Geneva/JVT-X201.zip, Geneva, Switzerland, June
             2007.

14.2. Informative References

   [DVB-H]   DVB - Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); DVB-H
             Implementation Guidelines, ETSI TR 102 377, 2005.

   [H.241]   ITU-T Rec. H.241, "Extended video procedures and control
             signals for H.300-series terminals", May 2006.

   [IGMP]    Cain, B., Deering S., Kovenlas, I., Fenner, B., and
             Thyagarajan, A., "Internet Group Management Protocol,
             Version 3", RFC 3376, October 2002.





Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 74]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   [JVT-N026] Ohm J.-R., Koenen, R., and Chiariglione, L. (ed.), "SVC
             requirements specified by MPEG (ISO/IEC JTC1 SC29 WG11)",
             JVT-N026, available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-
             site/2005_01_HongKongGeneva/JVT-N026.doc, Hong Kong, China,
             January 2005.

   [JVT-N027] Sullivan, G., and Wiegand, T. (ed.), "SVC requirements
             specified by VCEG (ITU-T SG16 Q.6)", JVT-N027, available
             from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-
             site/2005_01_HongKongGeneva/JVT-N027.doc, Hong Kong, China,
             January 2005.

   [McCanne] McCanne, S., Jacobson, V., and Vetterli, M., "Receiver-
             driven layered multicast", in Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM'96,
             pages 117--130, Stanford, CA, August 1996.

   [MBMS]    3GPP - Technical Specification Group Services and System
             Aspects; Multimedia Broadcast/Multicast Service (MBMS);
             Protocols and codecs (Release 6), December 2005.

   [MPEG2]   ISO/IEC International Standard 13818-2:1993.

   [RFC2326] Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., and R. Lanphier, "Real Time
             Streaming Protocol (RTSP)", RFC 2326, April 1998.

   [RFC2974] Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session
             Announcement Protocol", RFC 2974, October 2000.

   [RFC3450] Luby, M., Gemmell, J., Vicisano, L., Rizzo, L., and
             Crowcroft, J., "Asynchronous layered coding (ALC) protocol
             instantiation", RFC 3450, December 2002.

   [RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D, Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and
             Norrman, K., "The secure real-time transport protocol
             (SRTP)", RFC 3711, March 2004.

   [Yan]     Yan, J., Katrinis, K., May, M., and Plattner, R., "Media-
             And TCP-friendly congestion control for scalable video
             streams", in IEEE Trans. Multimedia, pages 196--206, April
             2006.

15. Authors' Addresses

   Stephan Wenger
   Nokia
   955 Page Mill Road


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 75]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   Palo Alto, CA 94304
   USA

   Phone: +1-650-862-7368
   EMail: stewe@stewe.org

   Ye-Kui Wang
   Nokia Research Center
   P.O. Box 100
   33721 Tampere
   Finland

   Phone: +358-50-466-7004
   EMail: ye-kui.wang@nokia.com

   Thomas Schierl
   Fraunhofer HHI
   Einsteinufer 37
   D-10587 Berlin
   Germany

   Phone: +49-30-31002-227
   Email: schierl@hhi.fhg.de

   Alex Eleftheriadis
   Vidyo, Inc.
   433 Hackensack Ave.
   Hackensack, NJ 07601
   USA

   Phone: +1-201-467-5135
   Email: alex@vidyo.com


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 76]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.  Further, the author Thomas Schierl of Fraunhofer
   HHI is sponsored by the European Commission under the contract number
   FP7-ICT-214063, project SEA.  The authors want to thank Jonathan
   Lennox for his valuable comments on and input to the draft.

16. Open Issues

   1) There is a list of remaining issues for decoding order recovery in
     session multiplexing, as documented in editing notes.



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 77]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   2) A lot of work needed for section9.2 (SDP parameters).

   3) Bugs in RFC 3984 (see the BIS draft) need to be fixed also in the
     memo.

   4) Clarify the usage of the new parameters like sprop-scalability-
     info, relation to SEI and usage in offer/answer.  In the Design
     Team's conference call on 6 May 2008, it was decided that Ye-Kui
     would study and report.

   5) Non-VCL NAL units, e.g. SEI messages and parameter sets, may be
     needed by an enhancement layer but not the base layer. However,
     according to SVC, within an access unit, these non-VCL NAL units
     must precede VCL NAL units in decoding order. In session
     multiplexing, should non-VCL NAL units be transported in the same
     session as the layer that requires the non-VCL NAL unit, or should
     they be always transported in the base session? It may be
     impossible to find out without parsing details which session
     respectively SPS/subset SPS a picture parameter set belongs to. It
     may make sense for simplicity to allow a MANE to include all of
     the non-VCL NAL units within all the sessions.  In the Design
     Team's conference call on 6 May 2008, it was decided that
     Jonathan/Alex would provide text change for review, including
     handling of prefix NAL units.

   6) sprop-spatial-resolution: do we need this for offering/answering
     spatial scalable layers? In this draft or a more generic draft? In
     the Design Team's conference call on 6 May 2008, it was decided
     that Ye-Kui will study and report.

17. Changes Log

   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-09

   5-9 May 2008: YkW

   - Added Alex as an editor. Welcome!
   -  Added text for session-multiplexing packetization modes
   -  Updated section6.5 (Packetization Modes) and added section6.5.1
   -  Updated section6.6 (DON) and added section6.6.1
   -  Updated PACSI introductory text and semantics (section6.9)
   -  Updated packetization rules for session multiplexing (section7.1)
   -  Updated the de-packetization process for session multiplexing
     (section8.1)



Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 78]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   -  Updated semantics of existing media type parameters and added new
     media type parameters ("pmode", "sprop-session-multiplexing-
     depth", "sprop-desemul-buf-req", "desemul-buf-cap", "sprop-
     desemul-init-buf-time", "sprop-semul-max-don-diff") in section9.1.
   -  Removed obsolete comments.
   -  Updated some definitions.
   -  Updated one design principle regarding cases that must use RFC
     3984 encapsulation.
   -  Removed "(Informative)" from the title of section8 (De-
     Packetization Process) - same to be proposed to RFC 3984 bis.
   -  Updated the open issues
   -  Removed earlier changes log that can be found from earlier
     versions of the draft

   13 May 2008: AE

   -  Corrected definition of "highest RTP session" in "enhancement RTP
     session" definition.
   -  Moved the triggering of the use of the S and E bits from the X
     flag to the Y flag, so that they are triggered together with
     TL0PICIDX.
   -  Other minor editorial corrections for language.

   13 May 2008: YkW

   -  Removed some obsolete comments.

   14 May 2008: AE

   -  Moved definition of lower/higher/lowest/highest RTP session from
     definitions (part of "enhancement RTP session") to 8.1.1, right
     before they are first needed. The text assumes that base is
     lowest, and highest is the single RTP session which no other
     session depends on.
   -  Modified definition of "operation point" to distinguish between
     the OP and the associated bitstream, as there may be multiple ways
     to construct it (i.e., removing or not removing unneeded NAL units
     below the operation point).
   -  Renamed modes as follows: NITS->NI-T, NICD->NI-C, NICB->NI-TC, and
     AINT->I-C. This way the interleaving and DON process are evident
     from the acronym.


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 79]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   -  Rephrased "target NAL unit" definition (in Section 6.9) to be a
     bit more clear.

   15 May 2008: YkW

   -  Added a comment regarding the definition of operation point.
   -  Updated open issues (removed the one on PACSI).
   -  Changed the Word template used to generation of this I-D.


   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-09 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-10

   30 May 2008: TS

   - Improved text in 7.1 for NI-T

   02 June 2008: TS

   - Improved text on NI-T and NI-TC in section 8.1.1
   - Added new packet type NI-MTAP in section 6.10
   - Added informative text on placeholder NAL units to section 7.1.1
   - Added text on placeholder NAL units to 8.1.1
   - Changed text regarding the order of RTP packets are delivered from
     the RFC3550 process to the re-ordering process in section 8.

   02 June 2008: JL

   - Added non-VCL and prefix NAL packetization rules sent by Jonathan
     Lennox in sections 7.1.4 and 7.1.5.
   - Added informative reordering algorithm.


   From draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-10 to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-11

   17 June 2008: TS

   - Addressed the following comments sent by Colin on 10 June 2008 to
     the mailing list:
   - Inserted table on NAL unit and packet types into section 3.3
   - Corrected text on NAL unit header ext. in 3.3
   - Corrected text in 3.4


Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 80]

Internet-Draft     RTP Payload Format for SVC Video           June 2008


   - Corrected text in 5.1.1 on base layer VCL Nal unit types
   - Added reference to MANEs in section 6.1
   - Used symbolic names for packetization modes
   - Corrected SDP examples
   - Removed H264 from media type section, TBD: text on "H264" needs to
     be moved
   - TBD: new name for session mux.
   - Improved text on NI-T mode







































Wenger, et al         Expires December 17, 2008               [Page 81]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/