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

Versions: (draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Draft is active
In: MissingRef
Network Working Group                                      S. Nandakumar
Internet-Draft                                                     Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track                           July 03, 2014
Expires: January 4, 2015


            A Framework for SDP Attributes when Multiplexing
                draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-02

Abstract

   The Session Description Protocol (SDP) provides mechanisms to
   describe attributes of multimedia sessions and of individual media
   streams (e.g., Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) sessions) within a
   multimedia session.  In the RTCWeb WG, there is a need to use a
   single 5-tuple for sending and receiving media associated with
   multiple media descriptions ("m=" lines).  Such a requirement has
   raised concerns over the semantic implications of the SDP attributes
   associated with the RTP Media Streams multiplexed over a single
   transport layer flow.

   The scope of this specification is to provide a framework for
   analyzing the multiplexing characteristics of SDP attributes.  The
   specification also categorizes existing attributes based on the
   framework described herein.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  SDP Attribute Analysis Framework  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Category: NORMAL  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Category: NOT RECOMMENDED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.3.  Category: IDENTICAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.4.  Category: SUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.5.  Category: TRANSPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.6.  Category: INHERIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.7.  Category: IDENTICAL-PER-PT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.8.  Category: SPECIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  Analysis of Existing Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     5.1.  RFC4566 - SDP: Session Description Protocol . . . . . . .  11
     5.2.  RFC4585 - RTP/AVPF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     5.3.  RFC5761 - Multiplexing RTP and RTCP . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.4.  RFC4574 - SDP Label Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.5.  RFC5432 - QoS Mechanism Selection in SDP  . . . . . . . .  13
     5.6.  RFC4568 - SDP Security Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.7.  RFC5762 - RTP over DCCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.8.  RFC6773 - DCCP-UDP Encapsulation  . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.9.  RFC5506 - Reduced-Size RTCP in RTP Profile  . . . . . . .  16
     5.10. RFC6787 - Media Resource Control Protocol Version 2 . . .  16
     5.11. RFC5245 - Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)  .  17
     5.12. RFC5285 - RTP Header Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     5.13. RFC3605 - RTCP attribute in SDP . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.14. RFC5576 - Source-Specific SDP Attributes  . . . . . . . .  19
     5.15. RFC6236 - Image Attributes in SDP . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     5.16. RFC6285 - Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP Sessions . .  21
     5.17. RFC6230 - Media Control Channel Framework . . . . . . . .  21
     5.18. RFC6364 - SDP Elements for FEC Framework  . . . . . . . .  22
     5.19. RFC4796 - Content Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     5.20. RFC3407 - SDP Simple Capability Declaration . . . . . . .  23
     5.21. RFC6284 - Port Mapping between Unicast and Multicast RTP
           Sessions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.22. RFC6714 - MSRP-CEMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


     5.23. RFC4583 - SDP Format for BFCP Streams . . . . . . . . . .  24
     5.24. RFC5547 - SDP Offer/Answer for File Transfer  . . . . . .  25
     5.25. RFC6489 - SDP and RTP Media Loopback Extension  . . . . .  25
     5.26. RFC5760 - RTCP with Unicast Feedback  . . . . . . . . . .  26
     5.27. RFC3611 - RTCP XR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     5.28. RFC5939 - SDP Capability Negotiation  . . . . . . . . . .  27
     5.29. RFC6871- SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation . . . . . . .  27
     5.30. RFC4567 - Key Management Extensions for SDP and RTSP  . .  28
     5.31. RFC4572 - Comedia over TLS in SDP . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     5.32. RFC4570 - SDP Source Filters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
     5.33. RFC6128 - RTCP Port for Multicast Sessions  . . . . . . .  29
     5.34. RFC6189 - ZRTP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
     5.35. RFC4145 - Connection-Oriented Media . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     5.36. RFC5159 - OMA BCAST SDP Attributes  . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     5.37. RFC6193 - Media Description for IKE in SDP  . . . . . . .  32
     5.38. RFC6064 - SDP and RTSP Extensions for 3GPP  . . . . . . .  33
     5.39. RFC3108 - ATM SDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
     5.40. 3GPP TS 24.182  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
     5.41. 3GPP TS 24.183  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  37
     5.42. 3GPP TS 24.229  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  37
     5.43. ITU T.38  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
     5.44. ITU-T H.248.15  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
     5.45. RFC4975 - The Message Session Relay Protocol  . . . . . .  40
     5.46. Historical  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  41
   6.  bwtype Attribute Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
     6.1.  RFC4566 - SDP: Session Description Protocol . . . . . . .  42
     6.2.  RFC3556 - SDP Bandwidth Modifiers for RTCP Bandwidth  . .  42
     6.3.  RFC3890 - Bandwidth Modifier for SDP  . . . . . . . . . .  43
   7.  rtcp-fb Attribute Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  44
     7.1.  RFC4585 - RTP/AVPF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  44
     7.2.  RFC5104 - Codec Control Messages in AVPF  . . . . . . . .  45
     7.3.  RFC6285 - Unicast-Based RAMS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
     7.4.  RFC6679 - ECN for RTP over UDP/IP . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
     7.5.  RFC6642 - Third-Party Loss Report . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
     7.6.  RFC5104 - Codec Control Messages in AVPF  . . . . . . . .  46
   8.  group Attribute Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  47
     8.1.  RFC5888 - SDP Grouping Framework  . . . . . . . . . . . .  47
     8.2.  RFC3524 - Mapping Media Streams to Resource Reservation
           Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  47
     8.3.  RFC4091 - ANAT Semantics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
     8.4.  RFC5956 - FEC Grouping Semantics in SDP . . . . . . . . .  48
     8.5.  RFC5583 - Signaling Media Decoding Dependency in SDP  . .  49
   9.  ssrc-group Attribute Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  49
     9.1.  RFC5576 - Source-Specific SDP Attributes  . . . . . . . .  49
   10. QoS Mechanism Token Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  50
     10.1.  RFC5432 - QoS Mechanism Selection in SDP . . . . . . . .  50
   11. k= Attribute Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  50
     11.1.  RFC4566 SDP: Session Description Protocol  . . . . . . .  50



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   12. content Atribute Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  50
     12.1.  RFC4796  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  50
   13. Payload Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51
     13.1.  RFC5109 - RTP Payload Format for Generic FEC . . . . . .  51
   14. Multiplexing Media Streams and DSCP Markings  . . . . . . . .  52
     14.1.  Option A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  52
     14.2.  Option B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53
   15. Multiplexing Considerations for Encapsulating Attributes  . .  53
     15.1.  RFC3407 - cpar Attribute Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . .  53
     15.2.  RFC5939 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
       15.2.1.  Recommendations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
         15.2.1.1.  Recommendation-1: Transport Capability Analysis   55
         15.2.1.2.  Recommendation-2: Attribute Capability Analysis   55
         15.2.1.3.  Recommendation-3: Sescap Attribute Analysis  . .  56
         15.2.1.4.  Recommendation-4: Capability Extension
                    Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     15.3.  RFC6871 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
       15.3.1.  Recommendation-5: Attribute Capability Under Shared
                Payload Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     15.4.  Recommendation-6: Offer/Answer Negotiation Expectations   57
   16. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  59
   17. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  60
   18. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  60
   19. Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  61
   20. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  62
     20.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  62
     20.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  62
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  68

1.  Introduction

   Real-Time Communication Web (RTCWeb) framework requires Real-time
   Transport Protocol (RTP) as the media transport protocol and Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] for describing and negotiating
   multi-media communication sessions.

   SDP defines several attributes for capturing characteristics that
   apply to the individual media descriptions (described by "m=" lines")
   and the overall multimedia session.  Typically different media types
   (audio, video etc) described using different media descriptions
   represent separate RTP Sessions that are carried over individual
   transport layer flows.  However in the IETF RTCWEB WG, a need to use
   a single 5-tuple for sending and receiving media associated with
   multiple SDP media descriptions ("m=" lines) has been identified.
   This would e.g. allow the usage of a single set of Interactive
   Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [RFC5245] candidates for multiple
   media descriptions.  This in turn has made necessary to understand




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   the interpretation and usage of the SDP attributes defined for the
   multiplexed media descriptions.

   Given the number of SDP attributes registered with the IANA [IANA]
   and possibility of new attributes being defined in the future, there
   is need for generic future-proof framework to analyze these
   attributes for their applicability in the transport multiplexing use-
   cases.

   The document starts with providing the motivation for requiring such
   a framework.  This is followed by introduction to the SDP attribute
   analysis framework/procedures, following which several sections
   applies the framework to the SDP attributes registered with the IANA
   [IANA]

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
   "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be
   interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

3.  Motivation

   The time and complications of setting up ICE [RFC5245] and DTLS-SRTP
   [RFC5763] transports for use by RTP, and conservation of ports, forms
   an requirement to try and reduce the number of transport level flows
   needed.  This has resulted in the definition of ways, such as,
   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation] and
   [I-D.ietf-avt-multiplexing-rtp] to multiplex RTP over a single
   transport flow in order to preserve network resources such as port
   numbers.  This imposes further restrictions on applicability of these
   SDP attributes as they are defined today.

   The specific problem is that there are attribute combinations which
   make sense when specified on independent m-lines -- as with classical
   SDP -- that do not make sense when those m-lines are then multiplexed
   over the same transport.  To give an obvious example, ICE permits
   each m=line to have an independently specified ice-ufrag attribute.
   However, if the media from multiple m-lines is multiplexed over the
   same ICE component, then the meaning of media-level ice-ufrag
   attributes becomes muddled.

   As of today there are close to 250 SDP attributes registered with the
   IANA [IANA] and more will be added in the future.  There is no
   clearly defined procedure to establish the validity/applicability of
   these attribute when used with transport multiplexing.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


4.  SDP Attribute Analysis Framework

   Attributes in an SDP session description can be defined at the
   session-level and media-level.  These attributes could be
   semantically grouped as noted below.

   o  Attributes related to media content such as media type, encoding
      schemes, payload types.

   o  Attributes specifying media transport characteristics like RTP/
      RTCP port numbers, network addresses, QOS.

   o  Metadata description attributes capturing session timing and
      origin information.

   o  Attributes establishing relationships between media streams such
      as grouping framework

   With the above semantic grouping as the reference, the proposed
   framework classifies each attribute into one of the following
   categories:

4.1.  Category: NORMAL

   Attributes that can be independently specified when multiplexing and
   retain their original semantics.

   In the example given below, the direction and label attributes are
   independently specified for audio and video m=lines.  These
   attributes are not impacted by multiplexing these media streams over
   a single transport layer flow.

        v=0
        o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        t=0 0
        m=audio 49172 RTP/AVP 99
        a=sendonly
        a=label:1
        a=rtpmap:99 iLBC/8000
        m=video 49172 RTP/AVP 31
        a=recvonly
        a=label:2
        a=rtpmap:31 H261/90000






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


4.2.  Category: NOT RECOMMENDED

   Attributes that are recommended against multiplexing since their
   usage under multiplexing might lead to incorrect behavior.

   Example: Multiplexing media descriptions having attribute zrtp-hash
   defined with the media descriptions lacking it, would either
   complicate the handling of multiplexed streams or might fail
   multiplexing altogether.

        v=0
        o=bob 2890844527 2890844527 IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        t=0 0
        m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 97 // with zrtp
        a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
        <allOneLine>
        a=zrtp-hash:1.10 fe30efd02423cb054e50efd0248742ac7a52c8f91bc2
        df881ae642c371ba46df
        </allOneLine>
        m=video 34567 RTP/AVP 31 //without zrtp
        a=rtpmap:31 H261/90000

4.3.  Category: IDENTICAL

   Attributes that MUST be identical across all the media descriptions
   being multiplexed.

   Attributes such as rtcp-mux fall into this category.  Since RTCP
   reporting is done per RTP Session, RTCP Multiplexing MUST to enabled
   for both the audio and video m=lines in the example below if they are
   transported over a single 5-tuple.

        v=0
        o=bob 2890844527 2890844527 IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        t=0 0
        m=audio 34567 RTP/AVP 97
        a=rtcp-mux
        m=video 34567 RTP/AVP 31
        a=rtpmap:31 H261/90000
        a=rtcp-mux







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


4.4.  Category: SUM

   Attributes can be set as they are normally used but software using
   them in a multiplex case, MUST apply the sum of all the attributes
   being multiplexed instead of trying to use each one.  This is
   typically used for bandwidth or other rate limiting attributes to the
   underlining transport.

   The software parsing the SDP sample below, should use the aggregate
   Application Specific (AS) bandwidth value from the individual media
   descriptions to determine the AS value for the multiplexed session.
   Thus the calculated AS value would be 256+64 bytes for the given
   example.

         v=0
         o=mhandley 2890844526 2890842807 IN IP4 126.16.64.4
         c=IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
         t=0 0
         m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0
         b=AS:64
         m=video 51372 RTP/AVP 31
         b=AS:256

4.5.  Category: TRANSPORT

   Attributes that can be set normally for multiple items in a
   multiplexed group but the software MUST pick just one of the
   attribute of the given type for use.  The one chosen is the attribute
   associated with the "m=" line that represents the information being
   used for the transport of the RTP.

   In the example below, "a=crypto" attribute is defined for both the
   audio and the video m=lines.  The video media line's a=crypto
   attribute is chosen since its mid value (bar) appears first in the
   a=group:BUNDLE line.  This is due to BUNDLE grouping semantic
   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation] which mandates the values
   from m=line corresponding to the mid appearing first on the
   a=group:BUNDLE line to be considered for setting up the RTP
   Transport.












Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


        v=0
        o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        t=0 0
        a=group:BUNDLE bar foo
        m=audio 49172 RTP/AVP 99
        a=mid:foo
        a=crypto:1 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80
          inline:d0RmdmcmVCspeEc3QGZiNWpVLFJhQX1cfHAwJSoj|2^20|1:32
        a=rtpmap:99 iLBC/8000
        m=video 51374 RTP/AVP 31
        a=mid:bar
        a=crypto:1 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80
          inline:EcGZiNWpFJhQXdspcl1ekcmVCNWpVLcfHAwJSoj|2^20|1:32
        a=rtpmap:96 H261/90000

4.6.  Category: INHERIT

   Attributes that encapsulate other SDP attributes and their
   multiplexing characteristics are inherited from the attributes they
   encapsulate.  Such attributes as of today, are defined in [RFC3407],
   [RFC5939] and [RFC6871] as part of a generic framework for indicating
   and negotiating transport, media and media format related
   capabilities in the SDP.

          v=0
          o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
          s=
          c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
          t=0 0
          m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 100
          a=rtpmap:100 VP8/90000
          a=fmtp:100 max-fr=30;max-fs=8040
          a=sqn: 0
          a=cdsc: 1 video RTP/AVP 100
          a=cpar: a=rtcp-mux
          m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 101
          a=rtpmap:101 VP8/90000
          a=fmtp:100 max-fr=15;max-fs=1200
          a=cdsc: 2 video RTP/AVP 101
          a=cpar: a=rtcp-mux

   In the above example , the category IDENTICAL is inherited for the
   cpar encapsulated rtcp-mux attribute.






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


4.7.  Category: IDENTICAL-PER-PT

   Attributes that define the RTP payload configuration on per Payload
   Type basis and MUST have identical values across all the media
   descriptions for a given RTP Payload Type when repeated.

   In the SDP example below, Payload Types 96 and 97 are repeated across
   all the video m= lines and all the payload specific parameters (ex:
   rtpmap, fmtp) are identical.


        v=0
        o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
        t=0 0
        a=group:BUNDLE cam1, cam2
        m = video 96 97
        a=mid:cam1
        a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
        a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=42400d; max-fs=3600; max-fps=3000;
        max-mbps=108000; max-br=1000
        a=rtpmap:97 H264/90000
        a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=42400a; max-fs=240; max-fps=3000;
        max-mbps=7200; max-br=200
        m = video  96 97
        a=mid:cam2
        a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
        a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=42400d; max-fs=3600; max-fps=3000;
        max-mbps=108000; max-br=1000
        a=rtpmap:97 H264/90000
        a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=42400a; max-fs=240; max-fps=3000;
        max-mbps=7200; max-br=200


4.8.  Category: SPECIAL

   Attributes where the text in the source draft must be consulted for
   further handling when multiplexed.

   As an example, for the attribute extmap, the specification defining
   the extension MUST be referred to understand the multiplexing
   implications.








Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


5.  Analysis of Existing Attributes

   This section analyzes attributes listed in IANA [IANA] grouped under
   the IETF document that defines them.  The "Level" column indicates
   whether the attribute is currently specified as:

   o  S -- Session level

   o  M -- Media level

   o  B -- Both

   o  SR -- Source-level (for a single SSRC)

5.1.  RFC4566 - SDP: Session Description Protocol

   RFC4566 [RFC4566] defines the Session Description Protocol (SDP) that
   is intended for describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of
   session announcement, session invitation, and other forms of
   multimedia session initiation

   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | Attr Name  | Notes                    | Level | Category          |
   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | sendrecv   | Not impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | sendonly   | Not impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | recvonly   | Not impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | inactive   | Not impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | cat        | Not impacted             | S     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | ptime      | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | maxptime   | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | orient     | Not Impacted             | M     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | framerate  | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   | quality    | Not Impacted             | M     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | rtpmap     | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | fmtp       | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | keywds     | Not impacted             | S     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | type       | Not Impacted             | S     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | tool       | Not Impacted             | S     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | charset    | Not Impacted             | S     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | sdplang    | Not Impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   | lang       | Not Impacted             | B     | NORMAL            |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+

                        RFC4566 Attribute Analysis

5.2.  RFC4585 - RTP/AVPF

   RFC4585 [RFC4585] defines an extension to the Audio-visual Profile
   (AVP) that enables receivers to provide, statistically, more
   immediate feedback to the senders and thus allows for short-term
   adaptation and efficient feedback-based repair mechanisms to be
   implemented.

   +----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Attr     | Notes                               | Level | Category |
   | Name     |                                     |       |          |
   +----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | rtcp-fb  | The combination of a particular     | M     | NORMAL   |
   |          | Payload Type along with the m=line  |       |          |
   |          | identify the scope and              |       |          |
   |          | applicability of a given RTCP       |       |          |
   |          | feedback to a particular RTP        |       |          |
   |          | Stream.                             |       |          |
   |          |                                     |       |          |
   +----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4585 Attribute Analysis



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   Since RTCP feedback attributes are Payload Type (PT) scoped, the
   usage of identical Payload Type values across multiplexed m=lines is
   described in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation].

5.3.  RFC5761 - Multiplexing RTP and RTCP

   RFC5761 [RFC5761] discusses issues that arise when multiplexing RTP
   data packets and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets on a single UDP
   port.  It describes when such multiplexing is and is not appropriate,
   and it explains how the Session Description Protocol (SDP) can be
   used to signal multiplexed sessions.

   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name      | Notes                            | Level | Category   |
   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | rtcp-mux  | RTP and RTCP Multiplexing affect | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |           | the entire RTP Session           |       |            |
   |           |                                  |       |            |
   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC5761 Attribute Analysis

5.4.  RFC4574 - SDP Label Attribute

   RFC4574 [RFC4574] defines a new Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   media-level attribute: "label".  The "label" attribute carries a
   pointer to a media stream in the context of an arbitrary network
   application that uses SDP.  The sender of the SDP document can attach
   the "label" attribute to a particular media stream or streams.  The
   application can then use the provided pointer to refer to each
   particular media stream in its context.

               +--------+---------------+-------+----------+
               | Name   | Notes         | Level | Category |
               +--------+---------------+-------+----------+
               | label  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
               |        |               |       |          |
               +--------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4574 Attribute Analysis

5.5.  RFC5432 - QoS Mechanism Selection in SDP

   RFC5432 [RFC5432] defines procedures to negotiate QOS mechanisms
   using the Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer/answer model.






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +----------------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name           | Notes                         | Level | Category |
   +----------------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | qos-mech-send  | A single DSCP code point per  | B     | NORMAL   |
   |                | flow being multiplexed        |       |          |
   |                | doesn't impact multiplexing   |       |          |
   |                | since QOS mechanisms are      |       |          |
   |                | signaled/scoped per flow.     |       |          |
   |                |                               |       |          |
   | qos-mech-recv  | A single DSCP code point per  | B     | NORMAL   |
   |                | flow being multiplexed        |       |          |
   |                | doesn't impact multiplexing   |       |          |
   |                | since QOS mechanisms are      |       |          |
   |                | signaled/scoped per flow.     |       |          |
   |                |                               |       |          |
   +----------------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5432 Attribute Analysis

   Multiplexing consideration when multiple DSCP code points are defined
   per flow can be found in Section 14

5.6.  RFC4568 - SDP Security Descriptions

   RFC4568 [RFC4568] defines a Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   cryptographic attribute for unicast media streams.  The attribute
   describes a cryptographic key and other parameters that serve to
   configure security for a unicast media stream in either a single
   message or a roundtrip exchange.

   +--------+---------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name   | Notes                                 | Level | Category |
   +--------+---------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | crypto | Refer to section 6.2.5 of [I-D.ietf-m | M     | SPECIAL  |
   |        | music-sdp-bundle-negotiation]         |       |          |
   |        |                                       |       |          |
   +--------+---------------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4568 Attribute Analysis

   If the multiplexing scheme cannot ensure unique SSRCs across all the
   media lines, multiplexing MUST NOT be performed.

5.7.  RFC5762 - RTP over DCCP

   The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is a widely used transport for
   real-time multimedia on IP networks.  The Datagram Congestion Control
   Protocol (DCCP) is a transport protocol that provides desirable



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   services for real-time applications.  RFC5762 [RFC5762] specifies a
   mapping of RTP onto DCCP, along with associated signaling, such that
   real-time applications can make use of the services provided by DCCP

   +--------------------+---------------------+---------+--------------+
   | Name               | Notes               | Current | Category     |
   +--------------------+---------------------+---------+--------------+
   | dccp-service-code  | If RFC6773 is not   | M       | NOT          |
   |                    | being used in       |         | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                    | addition to         |         |              |
   |                    | RFC5762, the port   |         |              |
   |                    | in the m= line is a |         |              |
   |                    | DCCP port. DCCP     |         |              |
   |                    | being a connection  |         |              |
   |                    | oriented protocol,  |         |              |
   |                    | does not allow      |         |              |
   |                    | multiple            |         |              |
   |                    | connections on the  |         |              |
   |                    | same 5-tuple.       |         |              |
   |                    |                     |         |              |
   +--------------------+---------------------+---------+--------------+

                        RFC5762 Attribute Analysis

   If RFC6773 is being used in addition to RFC5762 and provided that
   DCCP-in-UDP layer has additional demultiplexing, then it may be
   possible to use different DCCP service codes for each DCCP flow,
   given each uses a different DCCP port.  Although doing so might
   conflict with the media type of the m= line.  None of this is
   standardized yet and it wouldn't work as explained.  Hence
   multiplexing MUST NOT be performed even in this alternate scenario.

5.8.  RFC6773 - DCCP-UDP Encapsulation

   RFC6773 [RFC6773] document specifies an alternative encapsulation of
   the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP), referred to as DCCP-
   UDP.  This encapsulation allows DCCP to be carried through the
   current generation of Network Address Translation (NAT) middle boxes
   without modification of those middle boxes












Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | Name       | Notes                         | Level | Category     |
   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | dccp-port  | Multiplexing MUST NOT be      | M     | NOT          |
   |            | performed due to potential    |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |            | conflict between the port     |       |              |
   |            | used for DCCP                 |       |              |
   |            | en/decapsulation and the RTP. |       |              |
   |            |                               |       |              |
   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+

                        RFC6773 Attribute Analysis

   Since RFC6773 is about tunnelling DCCP in UDP, with the UDP port
   being the port of the DCCP en-/de-capsulation service.  This
   encapsulation allows arbitrary DCCP packets to be encapsulated and
   the DCCP port choosen MAY conflict with the port chosen for the RTP
   traffic.

   For multiplexing several DCCP-in-UDP encapsulations on the same UDP
   port, with no RTP traffic on the same port implies collapsing several
   DCCP port spaces together.  This MAY or MAY NOT work depending on the
   nature of DCCP encapsulations and ports choses thus rendering it to
   be very application dependant.

5.9.  RFC5506 - Reduced-Size RTCP in RTP Profile

   RFC5506 [RFC5506] discusses benefits and issues that arise when
   allowing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTCP) packets to be
   transmitted with reduced size.

   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name        | Notes                          | Level | Category   |
   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | rtcp-rsize  | Reduced size RTCP affects the  | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |             | entire RTP Session             |       |            |
   |             |                                |       |            |
   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC5506 Attribute Analysis

5.10.  RFC6787 - Media Resource Control Protocol Version 2

   The Media Resource Control Protocol Version 2 (MRCPv2) allows client
   hosts to control media service resources such as speech synthesizers,
   recognizers, verifiers, and identifiers residing in servers on the
   network.  MRCPv2 is not a "stand-alone" protocol -- it relies on
   other protocols, such as the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), to



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   coordinate MRCPv2 clients and servers and manage sessions between
   them, and the Session Description Protocol (SDP) to describe,
   discover, and exchange capabilities.  It also depends on SIP and SDP
   to establish the media sessions and associated parameters between the
   media source or sink and the media server.  Once this is done, the
   MRCPv2 exchange operates over the control session established above,
   allowing the client to control the media processing resources on the
   speech resource server.  RFC6787 [RFC6787] defines attributes for
   this purpose.

             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | Name      | Notes         | Level | Category |
             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | resource  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
             |           |               |       |          |
             | channel   | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
             |           |               |       |          |
             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6787 Attribute Analysis

5.11.  RFC5245 - Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)

   RFC5245 [RFC5245] describes a protocol for Network Address
   Translator(NAT) traversal for UDP-based multimedia sessions
   established with the offer/answer model.  This protocol is called
   Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE).  ICE makes use of the
   Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) protocol and its
   extension,Traversal Using Relay NAT (TURN).  ICE can be used by any
   protocol utilizing the offer/answer model, such as the Session
   Initiation Protocol (SIP).




















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +--------------------+-------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name               | Notes                   | Level | Category   |
   +--------------------+-------------------------+-------+------------+
   | ice-lite           | Not Impacted            | S     | NORMAL     |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   | ice-options        | Not Impacted            | S     | NORMAL     |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   | ice-pwd            | ice-pwd MUST be the one | B     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                    | that corresponds to the |       |            |
   |                    | m=line chosen for       |       |            |
   |                    | setting up the          |       |            |
   |                    | underlying transport    |       |            |
   |                    | flow                    |       |            |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   | ice-ufrag          | ice-ufrag MUST be the   | B     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                    | one that corresponds to |       |            |
   |                    | the m=line chosen for   |       |            |
   |                    | setting up the          |       |            |
   |                    | underlying transport    |       |            |
   |                    | flow                    |       |            |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   | candidate          | ice candidate MUST be   | M     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                    | the one that            |       |            |
   |                    | corresponds to the      |       |            |
   |                    | m=line chosen for       |       |            |
   |                    | setting up the          |       |            |
   |                    | underlying transport    |       |            |
   |                    | flow                    |       |            |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   | remote-candidates  | ice remote candidate    | M     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                    | MUST be the one that    |       |            |
   |                    | corresponds to the      |       |            |
   |                    | m=line chosen for       |       |            |
   |                    | setting up the          |       |            |
   |                    | underlying transport    |       |            |
   |                    | flow                    |       |            |
   |                    |                         |       |            |
   +--------------------+-------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC5245 Attribute Analysis

5.12.  RFC5285 - RTP Header Extensions

   RFC5285 [RFC5285] provides a general mechanism to use the header
   extension feature of RTP (the Real-Time Transport Protocol).  It
   provides the option to use a small number of small extensions in each
   RTP packet, where the universe of possible extensions is large and




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 18]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   registration is de-centralized.  The actual extensions in use in a
   session are signaled in the setup information for that session.

   +---------+--------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name    | Notes                                | Level | Category |
   +---------+--------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | extmap  | Specific RTP extension document MUST | B     | SPECIAL  |
   |         | be referred                          |       |          |
   |         |                                      |       |          |
   +---------+--------------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5285 Attribute Analysis

5.13.  RFC3605 - RTCP attribute in SDP

   Originally, SDP assumed that RTP and RTCP were carried on consecutive
   ports.  However, this is not always true when NATs are involved.
   [RFC3605] specifies an early mechanism to indicate the RTCP port.

   +-------+--------------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name  | Notes                                | Level | Category   |
   +-------+--------------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | rtcp  | Identical attribute value MUST be    | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |       | used since the RTCP port affects the |       |            |
   |       | entire RTP session.                  |       |            |
   |       |                                      |       |            |
   +-------+--------------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC3605 Attribute Analysis

5.14.  RFC5576 - Source-Specific SDP Attributes

   RFC5576 [RFC5576] defines a mechanism to describe RTP media sources,
   which are identified by their synchronization source (SSRC)
   identifiers, in SDP, to associate attributes with these sources, and
   to express relationships among sources.  It also defines several
   source-level attributes that can be used to describe properties of
   media sources.













Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 19]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +----------------+----------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | Name           | Notes                | Level | Category          |
   +----------------+----------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | ssrc           | Refer to Notes below | M     | NORMAL            |
   |                |                      |       |                   |
   | ssrc-group     | Refer to section     | M     | SPECIAL           |
   |                | Section 9 for        |       |                   |
   |                | specific analysis of |       |                   |
   |                | the grouping         |       |                   |
   |                | semantics            |       |                   |
   |                |                      |       |                   |
   | cname          | Not Impacted [Open   | SR    | NORMAL            |
   |                | Issues: what are the |       |                   |
   |                | rules for CNAME      |       |                   |
   |                | duplication across   |       |                   |
   |                | sessions?]           |       |                   |
   |                |                      |       |                   |
   | previous-ssrc  | Refer to notes below | SR    | NORMAL            |
   |                |                      |       |                   |
   | fmtp           | The attribute value  | SR    | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |                | must be same for a   |       |                   |
   |                | given codec          |       |                   |
   |                | configuration        |       |                   |
   |                |                      |       |                   |
   +----------------+----------------------+-------+-------------------+

                        RFC5576 Attribute Analysis

   If SSRCs are repeated across m=lines being multiplexed, they MUST all
   represent the same underlying RTP Source.  For more details on
   implications of SSRC values with in the context of multiplexing
   please refer to [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]

5.15.  RFC6236 - Image Attributes in SDP

   RFC6236 [RFC6236] proposes a new generic session setup attribute to
   make it possible to negotiate different image attributes such as
   image size.  A possible use case is to make it possible for a low-end
   hand-held terminal to display video without the need to rescale the
   image,something that may consume large amounts of memory and
   processing power.  The document also helps to maintain an optimal
   bitrate for video as only the image size that is desired by the
   receiver is transmitted.








Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 20]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | Name       | Notes                    | Level | Category          |
   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | imageattr  | The attribute value must | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   |            | be same for a given      |       |                   |
   |            | codec configuration      |       |                   |
   |            |                          |       |                   |
   +------------+--------------------------+-------+-------------------+

                        RFC6236 Attribute Analysis

5.16.  RFC6285 - Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP Sessions

   RFC6285 [RFC6285] describes a method using the existing RTP and RTP
   Control Protocol (RTCP) machinery that reduces the acquisition delay.
   In this method, an auxiliary unicast RTP session carrying the
   Reference Information to the receiver precedes or accompanies the
   multicast stream.  This unicast RTP flow can be transmitted at a
   faster than natural bitrate to further accelerate the acquisition.
   The motivating use case for this capability is multicast applications
   that carry real-time compressed audio and video.

     +---------------+-------------------+-------+------------------+
     | Name          | Notes             | Level | Category         |
     +---------------+-------------------+-------+------------------+
     | rams-updates  | Not recommended   | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED  |
     |               |                   |       |                  |
     +---------------+-------------------+-------+------------------+

                        RFC6285 Attribute Analysis

5.17.  RFC6230 - Media Control Channel Framework

   RFC6230 [RFC6230] describes a framework and protocol for application
   deployment where the application programming logic and media
   processing are distributed.  This implies that application
   programming logic can seamlessly gain access to appropriate resources
   that are not co-located on the same physical network entity.  The
   framework uses the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to establish an
   application-level control mechanism between application servers and
   associated external servers such as media servers.










Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 21]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


             +---------+-----------------+-------+----------+
             | Name    | Notes           | Level | Category |
             +---------+-----------------+-------+----------+
             | cfw-id  | Not Applicable  | M     | NORMAL   |
             |         |                 |       |          |
             +---------+-----------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6230 Attribute Analysis

5.18.  RFC6364 - SDP Elements for FEC Framework

   RFC6364 [RFC6364] specifies the use of the Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) to describe the parameters required to signal the
   Forward Error Correction (FEC) Framework Configuration Information
   between the sender(s) and receiver(s).  This document also provides
   examples that show the semantics for grouping multiple source and
   repair flows together for the applications that simultaneously use
   multiple instances of the FEC Framework.

              +------------------+-------+-------+----------+
              | Name             | Notes | Level | Category |
              +------------------+-------+-------+----------+
              | fec-source-flow  |       | M     | SPECIAL  |
              |                  |       |       |          |
              | fec-repair-flow  |       | M     | SPECIA:  |
              |                  |       |       |          |
              | repair-window    |       | M     | SPECIAL  |
              |                  |       |       |          |
              +------------------+-------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6364 Attribute Analysis

5.19.  RFC4796 - Content Attribute

   RFC4796 [RFC4796] defines a new Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   media-level attribute, 'content'.  The 'content' attribute defines
   the content of the media stream to a more detailed level than the
   media description line.  The sender of an SDP session description can
   attach the 'content' attribute to one or more media streams.  The
   receiving application can then treat each media stream differently
   (e.g., show it on a big or small screen) based on its content.










Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 22]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | Name     | Notes         | Level | Category |
              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | content  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
              |          |               |       |          |
              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4796 Attribute Analysis

5.20.  RFC3407 - SDP Simple Capability Declaration

   RFC3407 [RFC3407] defines a set of Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   attributes that enables SDP to provide a minimal and backwards
   compatible capability declaration mechanism.

         +----------+------------------------+-------+----------+
         | Name     | Notes                  | Level | Category |
         +----------+------------------------+-------+----------+
         | sqn      | Not Impacted           | B     | NORMAL   |
         |          |                        |       |          |
         | cdsc     | Not Impacted.          | B     | NORMAL   |
         |          |                        |       |          |
         | cpar     | Refer to Section 15    | B     | INHERIT  |
         |          |                        |       |          |
         | cparmin  | Refer to notes below   | B     | SPECIAL  |
         |          |                        |       |          |
         | cparmax  | Refer to notes below   | B     | SPECIAL  |
         |          |                        |       |          |
         +----------+------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC3407 Attribute Analysis

   Since the attributes (a=cparmin and a=cparmax) defines minimum and
   maximum numerical values associated with the attributed described in
   a=cpar, it is recommended to consult the document defining the
   attribute for dealing under media stream multiplexing.

5.21.  RFC6284 - Port Mapping between Unicast and Multicast RTP Sessions

   RFC6284 [RFC6284] presents a port mapping solution that allows RTP
   receivers to choose their own ports for an auxiliary unicast session
   in RTP applications using both unicast and multicast services.  The
   solution provides protection against denial-of-service or packet
   amplification attacks that could be used to cause one or more RTP
   packets to be sent to a victim client






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 23]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------------+-------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | Name             | Notes                   | Level | Category     |
   +------------------+-------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | portmapping-req  | Not recommended, if     | M     | NOT          |
   |                  | port mapping is         |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                  | required by the         |       |              |
   |                  | application             |       |              |
   |                  |                         |       |              |
   +------------------+-------------------------+-------+--------------+

                        RFC6284 Attribute Analysis

5.22.  RFC6714 - MSRP-CEMA

   RFC6714 [RFC6714] defines a Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)
   extension, Connection Establishment for Media Anchoring (CEMA).
   Support of this extension is OPTIONAL.  The extension allows middle
   boxes to anchor the MSRP connection, without the need for middle
   boxes to modify the MSRP messages; thus, it also enables secure end-
   to-end MSRP communication in networks where such middle boxes are
   deployed.  This document also defines a Session Description Protocol
   (SDP) attribute, 'msrp-cema', that MSRP endpoints use to indicate
   support of the CEMA extension.

             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | Name       | Notes         | Level | Category |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | msrp-cema  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
             |            |               |       |          |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6714 Attribute Analysis

5.23.  RFC4583 - SDP Format for BFCP Streams

   RFC4583 [RFC4583] document specifies how to describe Binary Floor
   Control Protocol (BFCP) streams in Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   descriptions.  User agents using the offer/answer model to establish
   BFCP streams use this format in their offers and answers












Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 24]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------+---------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name       | Notes                           | Level | Category   |
   +------------+---------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | floorctrl  | Must be repeated across all the | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |            | multiplexed m=lines             |       |            |
   |            |                                 |       |            |
   | confid     | Not Impacted                    | M     | NORMAL     |
   |            |                                 |       |            |
   | userid     | Not Impacted                    | M     | NORMAL     |
   |            |                                 |       |            |
   | floorid    | The floorid MUST be globally    | M     | NORMAL     |
   |            | unique                          |       |            |
   |            |                                 |       |            |
   +------------+---------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4583 Attribute Analysis

5.24.  RFC5547 - SDP Offer/Answer for File Transfer

   RFC5547 [RFC5547] provides a mechanism to negotiate the transfer of
   one or more files between two endpoints by using the Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) offer/answer model specified in [RFC3264].

        +----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
        | Name                 | Notes         | Level | Category |
        +----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
        | file-selector        | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                      |               |       |          |
        | file-transfer-id     | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                      |               |       |          |
        | file-disposition     | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                      |               |       |          |
        | file-date            | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                      |               |       |          |
        | file-iconfile-range  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                      |               |       |          |
        +----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5547 Attribute Analysis

5.25.  RFC6489 - SDP and RTP Media Loopback Extension

   [MEDIA_LOOPBACK] adds new SDP media types and attributes, which
   enable establishment of media sessions where the media is looped back
   to the transmitter.  Such media sessions will serve as monitoring and
   troubleshooting tools by providing the means for measurement of more
   advanced VoIP, Real-time Text and Video over IP performance metrics.




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 25]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------------------------+----------------+-------+----------+
   | Name                         | Notes          | Level | Category |
   +------------------------------+----------------+-------+----------+
   | loopback rtp-pkt-loopback    | Not Impacted   | M     | NORMAL   |
   |                              |                |       |          |
   | loopback rtp-media-loopback  | Not Impacted   | M     | NORMAL   |
   |                              |                |       |          |
   | loopback-source              | Not Impacted   | M     | NORMAL   |
   |                              |                |       |          |
   | loopback-mirror              | Not Impacted   | M     | NORMAL   |
   |                              |                |       |          |
   +------------------------------+----------------+-------+----------+

   An Extension to the Session Description Protocol (SDP) and Real-time
                Transport Protocol (RTP) for Media Loopback

5.26.  RFC5760 - RTCP with Unicast Feedback

   RFC5760 [RFC5760] specifies an extension to the Real-time Transport
   Control Protocol (RTCP) to use unicast feedback to a multicast
   sender.  The proposed extension is useful for single-source multicast
   sessions such as Source-Specific Multicast (SSM) communication where
   the traditional model of many-to-many group communication is either
   not available or not desired.

   +---------------+------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name          | Notes                        | Level | Category   |
   +---------------+------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | rtcp-unicast  | The attribute MUST be        | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |               | reported across all m=lines  |       |            |
   |               | multiplexed                  |       |            |
   |               |                              |       |            |
   +---------------+------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC5760 Attribute Analysis

5.27.  RFC3611 - RTCP XR

   RFC3611 [RFC3611] defines the Extended Report (XR) packet type for
   the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP), and defines how the use of XR
   packets can be signaled by an application if it employs the Session
   Description Protocol (SDP).









Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 26]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | Name     | Notes         | Level | Category |
              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | rtcp-xr  | Not Impacted  | B     | NORMAL   |
              |          |               |       |          |
              +----------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC3611 Attribute Analysis

5.28.  RFC5939 - SDP Capability Negotiation

   RFC5939 [RFC5939] defines a general SDP Capability Negotiation
   framework.  It also specifies how to provide attributes and transport
   protocols as capabilities and negotiate them using the framework.
   Extensions for other types of capabilities (e.g., media types and
   media formats) may be provided in other documents.

       +-------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+
       | Name  | Notes                         | Level | Category |
       +-------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+
       | pcfg  | Refer to section Section 15   | M     | INHERIT  |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       | acfg  | Refer to section Section 15   | M     | INHERIT  |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       | csup  | Not Impacted                  | B     | NORMAL   |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       | creq  | Not Impacted                  | B     | NORMAL   |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       | acap  | Refer to section Section 15   | B     | INHERIT  |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       | tcap  | Refer to section Section 15   | B     | INHERIT  |
       |       |                               |       |          |
       +-------+-------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5939 Attribute Analysis

5.29.  RFC6871- SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation

   Session Description Protocol (SDP) capability negotiation provides a
   general framework for indicating and negotiating capabilities in SDP.
   The base framework defines only capabilities for negotiating
   transport protocols and attributes.  [RFC6871] extends the framework
   by defining media capabilities that can be used to negotiate media
   types and their associated parameters.







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 27]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


       +---------+------------------------------+-------+----------+
       | Name    | Notes                        | Level | Category |
       +---------+------------------------------+-------+----------+
       | rmcap   | Refer to section Section 15  | B     | INHERIT  |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       | omcap   | Refer to section Section 15  | B     | INHERIT  |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       | mfcap   | Refer to section Section 15  | B     | INHERIT  |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       | mscap   | Refer to section Section 15  | B     | INHERIT  |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       | lcfg    | Not Impacted                 | B     | NORMAL   |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       | sescap  | Refer to section Section 15  | S     | INHERIT  |
       |         |                              |       |          |
       +---------+------------------------------+-------+----------+

     Session Description Protocol (SDP) Media Capabilities Negotiation

5.30.  RFC4567 - Key Management Extensions for SDP and RTSP

   RFC4567 [RFC4567] defines general extensions for Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) and Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP) to carry
   messages, as specified by a key management protocol, in order to
   secure the media.  These extensions are presented as a framework, to
   be used by one or more key management protocols.  As such, their use
   is meaningful only when complemented by an appropriate key management
   protocol.

   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name      | Notes                            | Level | Category   |
   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | key-mgmt  | Key management protocol MUST be  | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |           | identical across all the m=lines |       |            |
   |           |                                  |       |            |
   +-----------+----------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4567 Attribute Analysis

5.31.  RFC4572 - Comedia over TLS in SDP

   RFC4572 [RFC4572] specifies how to establish secure connection-
   oriented media transport sessions over the Transport Layer Security
   (TLS) protocol using the Session Description Protocol (SDP).  It
   defines a new SDP protocol identifier, 'TCP/TLS'.  It also defines
   the syntax and semantics for an SDP 'fingerprint' attribute that
   identifies the certificate that will be presented for the TLS
   session.  This mechanism allows media transport over TLS connections



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 28]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   to be established securely, so long as the integrity of session
   descriptions is assured.

   +--------------+-------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name         | Notes                         | Level | Category   |
   +--------------+-------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | fingerprint  | Fingerprint value from the    | B     | TRANSPORT  |
   |              | m=line defining the           |       |            |
   |              | underlying transport is       |       |            |
   |              | chosen                        |       |            |
   |              |                               |       |            |
   +--------------+-------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4572 Attribute Analysis

5.32.  RFC4570 - SDP Source Filters

   RFC4570 [RFC4570] describes how to adapt the Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) to express one or more source addresses as a source
   filter for one or more destination "connection" addresses.  It
   defines the syntax and semantics for an SDP "source-filter" attribute
   that may reference either IPv4 or IPv6 address(es) as either an
   inclusive or exclusive source list for either multicast or unicast
   destinations.  In particular, an inclusive source-filter can be used
   to specify a Source-Specific Multicast (SSM) session

   +----------------+-----------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name           | Notes                       | Level | Category   |
   +----------------+-----------------------------+-------+------------+
   | source-filter  | The attribute MUST be       | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                | repeated across all m=lines |       |            |
   |                | multiplexed                 |       |            |
   |                |                             |       |            |
   +----------------+-----------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4570 Attribute Analysis

5.33.  RFC6128 - RTCP Port for Multicast Sessions

   The Session Description Protocol (SDP) has an attribute that allows
   RTP applications to specify an address and a port associated with the
   RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) traffic.  In RTP-based source-specific
   multicast (SSM) sessions, the same attribute is used to designate the
   address and the RTCP port of the Feedback Target in the SDP
   description.  However, the RTCP port associated with the SSM session
   itself cannot be specified by the same attribute to avoid ambiguity,
   and thus, is required to be derived from the "m=" line of the media
   description.  Deriving the RTCP port from the "m=" line imposes an



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 29]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   unnecessary restriction.  RFC6128 [RFC6128] removes this restriction
   by introducing a new SDP attribute.

   +-----------------+----------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name            | Notes                      | Level | Category   |
   +-----------------+----------------------------+-------+------------+
   | multicast-rtcp  | Multicast RTCP port MUST   | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                 | be identical across all    |       |            |
   |                 | the m=lines                |       |            |
   |                 |                            |       |            |
   +-----------------+----------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC6128 Attribute Analysis

5.34.  RFC6189 - ZRTP

   RFC6189 [RFC6189] defines ZRTP, a protocol for media path Diffie-
   Hellman exchange to agree on a session key and parameters for
   establishing unicast Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
   sessions for Voice over IP (VoIP) applications.

   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | Name       | Notes                         | Level | Category     |
   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+
   | zrtp-hash  | Complicates if all the        | M     | NOT          |
   |            | m=lines are not authenticated |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |            | as given in the example below |       |              |
   |            |                               |       |              |
   +------------+-------------------------------+-------+--------------+

                        RFC6189 Attribute Analysis

   Example: Multiplexing media descriptions having attribute zrtp-hash
   defined with the media descriptions lacking it, would either
   complicate the handling of multiplexed stream or fail multiplexing.
















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 30]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


        v=0
        o=bob 2890844527 2890844527 IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        s=
        c=IN IP4 client.biloxi.example.com
        t=0 0
        m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 97
        a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
        <allOneLine>
        a=zrtp-hash:1.10 fe30efd02423cb054e50efd0248742ac7a52c8f91bc2
        df881ae642c371ba46df
        </allOneLine>
        m=video 34567 RTP/AVP 31
        a=rtpmap:31 H261/90000

5.35.  RFC4145 - Connection-Oriented Media

   RFC4145 [RFC4145] describes how to express media transport over TCP
   using the Session Description Protocol (SDP).  It defines the SDP
   'TCP' protocol identifier, the SDP 'setup' attribute, which describes
   the connection setup procedure, and the SDP 'connection' attribute,
   which handles connection reestablishment.

   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name        | Notes                          | Level | Category   |
   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | setup       | MUST be identical across all   | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |             | m=lines                        |       |            |
   |             |                                |       |            |
   | connection  | MUST be identical across all   | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |             | m=lines                        |       |            |
   |             |                                |       |            |
   +-------------+--------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4145 Attribute Analysis

5.36.  RFC5159 - OMA BCAST SDP Attributes

   RFC5159 [RFC5159] provides descriptions of Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) attributes used by the Open Mobile Alliance's
   Broadcast Service and Content Protection specification.











Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 31]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


        +---------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
        | Name                | Notes         | Level | Category |
        +---------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
        | bcastversion        | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
        |                     |               |       |          |
        | stkmstream          | Not Impacted  | B     | NORMAL   |
        |                     |               |       |          |
        | SRTPAuthentication  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                     |               |       |          |
        | SRTPROCTxRate       | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
        |                     |               |       |          |
        +---------------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5159 Attribute Analysis

5.37.  RFC6193 - Media Description for IKE in SDP

   RFC6193 [RFC6193] specifies how to establish a media session that
   represents a virtual private network using the Session Initiation
   Protocol for the purpose of on-demand media/application sharing
   between peers.  It extends the protocol identifier of the Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) so that it can negotiate use of the
   Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE) for media sessions in the SDP
   offer/answer model.

   +-------------------+--------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name              | Notes                    | Level | Category   |
   +-------------------+--------------------------+-------+------------+
   | ike-setup         | Attribute MUST be        | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                   | identical across all the |       |            |
   |                   | m=lines                  |       |            |
   |                   |                          |       |            |
   | psk-fingerprint   | Attribute MUST be        | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                   | identical across all the |       |            |
   |                   | m=lines                  |       |            |
   |                   |                          |       |            |
   | ike-esp           | Attribute MUST be        | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                   | identical across all the |       |            |
   |                   | m=lines                  |       |            |
   |                   |                          |       |            |
   | ike-esp-udpencap  | Attribute MUST be        | B     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                   | identical across all the |       |            |
   |                   | m=lines                  |       |            |
   |                   |                          |       |            |
   +-------------------+--------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC6193 Attribute Analysis




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 32]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   With the above SDP constraints, a session multiplexed with multiple
   m=lines will use only one IPSec association for all of the m= lines.

5.38.  RFC6064 - SDP and RTSP Extensions for 3GPP

   The Packet-switched Streaming Service (PSS) and the Multimedia
   Broadcast/Multicast Service (MBMS) defined by 3GPP use the Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) and Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP)
   with some extensions.  RFC6064 [RFC6064] provides information about
   these extensions and registers the RTSP and SDP extensions with IANA.

   +--------------------------+--------------+-------+-----------------+
   | Name                     | Notes        | Level | Category        |
   +--------------------------+--------------+-------+-----------------+
   | X-predecbufsize          | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | X-initpredecbufperiod    | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | X-initpostdecbufperiod   | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | X-decbyterate            | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3gpp-videopostdecbufsize | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | framesize                | The          | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-  |
   |                          | attribute    |       | PT              |
   |                          | value must   |       |                 |
   |                          | be same for  |       |                 |
   |                          | a given      |       |                 |
   |                          | codec config |       |                 |
   |                          | uration      |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-Integrity-Key       | Refer to     | S     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-SRTP-Config         | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | alt,alt-default-id       | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | alt-group                | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 33]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-Adaptation-Support  | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-Asset-Informatio    | Refer to     | B     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | mbms-mode                | Refer to     | B     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | mbms-flowid              | MRefer to    | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | mbms-repair              | Refer to     | B     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |                          | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-                | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Metrics:Corruption       | notes below  |       |                 |
   | duration                 |              |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-                | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Metrics:Rebuffering      | notes below  |       |                 |
   | duration                 |              |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Initial | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | buffering duration       | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-                | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Metrics:Successive loss  | notes below  |       |                 |
   | of RTP packets           |              |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Frame   | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | rate deviation           | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Jitter  | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | duration                 | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Content | Refer to     | B     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Switch Time              | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Average | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Codec Bitrat             | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Codec   | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Information              | notes below  |       |                 |
   |                          |              |       |                 |
   | 3GPP-QoE-Metrics:Buffer  | Refer to     | M     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   | Status                   | notes below  |       |                 |



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 34]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   |                          |              |       |                 |
   +--------------------------+--------------+-------+-----------------+

                        RFC6064 Attribute Analysis

   [RFC6064] defines SDP attributes that are applicable in the
   declarative usage of SDP alone.  For purposes of this document, only
   the Offer/Answer usage of SDP is considered as mandated by
   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation].

5.39.  RFC3108 - ATM SDP

   RFC3108 [RFC3108] describes conventions for using the Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) described for controlling ATM Bearer
   Connections, and any associated ATM Adaptation Layer (AAL)

       +------------------------+--------------+-------+----------+
       | Name                   | Notes        | Level | Category |
       +------------------------+--------------+-------+----------+
       | aalType                | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | eecid                  | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aalType                | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | capability             | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | qosClass               | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | bcob                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | stc                    | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | upcc                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | atmQOSparms            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | atmTrfcDesc            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | abrParms               | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | abrSetup               | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | bearerType             | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | lij                    | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | anycast                | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | cache                  | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | bearerSigIE            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aalApp                 | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | cbrRate                | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | sbc                    | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | clkrec                 | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | fec                    | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | prtfl                  | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | structure              | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | cpsSDUsize             | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aal2CPS                | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aal2CPSSDUrate         | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aal2sscs3661unassured  | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aal2sscs3661assured    | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 35]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


       | aal2sscs3662           | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | aal5sscop              | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | atmmap                 | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | silenceSupp            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | ecan                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | gc                     | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | profileDesc            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | vsel                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | dsel                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | fsel                   | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | onewaySel              | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | codecconfig            | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | isup_usi               | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | isup_usi               | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       | chain                  | Not Impacted | B     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |              |       |          |
       +------------------------+--------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC3108 Attribute Analysis

   RFC3108 describes conventions for using the Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) for characterizing ATM bearer connections using an
   AAL1, AAL2 or AAL5 adaptation layers.  For AAL1, AAL2 and AAL5,
   bearer connections can be used to transport single media streams.  In
   addition, for AAL1 and AAL2, multiple media streams may be
   multiplexed into a bearer connection.  For all adaptation types
   (AAL1, AAL2 and AAL5), bearer connections may be bundled into a
   single media group.  In all cases addressed by RFC3108, a real-time
   media stream (voice, video, voiceband data, pseudo-wire and others)
   or a multiplex of media streams is mapped directly into an ATM
   connection.  RFC3108 does not address cases where ATM serves as a
   low-level transport pipe for IP packets which in turn may carry one
   or more real-time (e.g.  VoIP) media sessions with a life-cycle
   different from that of the underlying ATM transport.

5.40.  3GPP TS 24.182

   3GPP TS 24.182 [R3GPPTS24.182] specifies IP multimedia subsystem
   Custom Alerting tones












Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 36]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name        | Notes                            | Level | Category |
   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | g.3gpp.cat  | Usage defined for the IP         | M     | NORMAL   |
   |             | Multimedia Subsystem             |       |          |
   |             |                                  |       |          |
   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+

                     3GPP TS 24.182 Attribute Analysis

5.41.  3GPP TS 24.183

   3GPP TS 24.183 [R3GPPTS24.183]specifies IP multimedia subsystem
   Custom Ringing Signal

   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name        | Notes                            | Level | Category |
   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | g.3gpp.crs  | Usage defined for the IP         | M     | NORMAL   |
   |             | Multimedia Subsystem             |       |          |
   |             |                                  |       |          |
   +-------------+----------------------------------+-------+----------+

                     3GPP TS 24.183 Attribute Analysis

5.42.  3GPP TS 24.229

   3GPP TS 24.229 [R3GPPTS24.229]IP multimedia call control protocol
   based on Session Initial protocol and Session Description Protocol.






















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 37]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name             | Notes                     | Level | Category   |
   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+
   | secondary-realm  | Per media-level attribute | M     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                  | MUST be used per          |       |            |
   |                  | underlying transport      |       |            |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | visited-realm    | Per media-level attribute | M     | TRANSPORT  |
   |                  | MUST be used per          |       |            |
   |                  | underlying transport      |       |            |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-m-cksum      | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-s-cksum      | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-m-att        | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-s-bw         | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-s-bw         | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-m-att        | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | omr-codecs       | Not Impacted              | M     | NORMAL     |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+

                     3GPP TS 24.229 Attribute Analysis

5.43.  ITU T.38

   ITU T.38[T.38] defines procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile
   communications over IP networks.


















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 38]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


       +------------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
       | Name                   | Notes         | Level | Category |
       +------------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
       | T38FaxVersion          | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38MaxBitRate          | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxFillBitRemoval   | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxTranscodingMMR   | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxTranscodingJBIG  | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxRateManagement   | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxMaxBuffer        | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxMaxDatagram      | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       | T38FaxUdpEC            | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
       |                        |               |       |          |
       +------------------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        Historic Attribute Analysis

   The ITU T.38 attributes are clearly unaffected by multiplexing and
   are specific to the working of the fax protocol itself.

5.44.  ITU-T H.248.15

   ITU-T H.248.15 [H.248.15] defines Gateway Control Protocol SDP H.248
   package attribute



















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 39]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +-----------+------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name      | Notes                              | Level | Category |
   +-----------+------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | h248item  | It is also only applicable for     | B     | SPECIAL  |
   |           | signaling the inclusion of H.248   |       |          |
   |           | extension packages to a gateway    |       |          |
   |           | via the local and remote           |       |          |
   |           | descriptors.  The attribute itself |       |          |
   |           | is unaffected by multiplexing, but |       |          |
   |           | the packaged referenced in a       |       |          |
   |           | specific use of the attribute may  |       |          |
   |           | be impacted.  Further analysis  of |       |          |
   |           | each package is needed to          |       |          |
   |           | determine if there is an issue.    |       |          |
   |           | This is only a concern in          |       |          |
   |           | environments using a decomposed    |       |          |
   |           | server/gateway with H.248 signaled |       |          |
   |           | between them.  The ITU-T will need |       |          |
   |           | to do further analysis of various  |       |          |
   |           | packages when they specify how to  |       |          |
   |           | signal the use of multiplexing to  |       |          |
   |           | a gateway.                         |       |          |
   |           |                                    |       |          |
   +-----------+------------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        Historic Attribute Analysis

5.45.  RFC4975 - The Message Session Relay Protocol

   RFC4975 [RFC4975] the Message Session Relay Protocol, a protocol for
   transmitting a series of related instant messages in the context of a
   session.  Message sessions are treated like any other media stream
   when set up via a rendezvous or session creation protocol such as the
   Session Initiation Protocol.

















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 40]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


       +-----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
       | Name                  | Notes         | Level | Category |
       +-----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
       | accept-types          | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
       |                       |               |       |          |
       | accept-wrapped-types  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
       |                       |               |       |          |
       | max-size              | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
       |                       |               |       |          |
       | path                  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
       |                       |               |       |          |
       +-----------------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4975 Attribute Analysis

5.46.  Historical

   This section specifies analysis for the attributes that are included
   for historic usage alone by the [IANA].

   +---------------------+--------------+---------------+--------------+
   | Name                | Notes        | Level         | Category     |
   +---------------------+--------------+---------------+--------------+
   | rtpred1             | Historic     | Not-Applcable | NOT          |
   |                     | attributes.  |               | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   | rtpred2             | Historic     | Not-Applcable | NOT          |
   |                     | attributes.  |               | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   | PSCid               | Not          | Not-Applcable | TBD          |
   |                     | Applicable   |               |              |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   | bc_service          | Not          | Not-Applcable | TBD          |
   |                     | Applicable   |               |              |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   | bc_program          | Not          | Not-Applcable | TBD          |
   |                     | Applicable   |               |              |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   | bc_service_package  | Not          | Not-Applcable | TBD          |
   |                     | Applicable   |               |              |
   |                     |              |               |              |
   +---------------------+--------------+---------------+--------------+

                        Unknowns Attribute Analysis







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 41]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


6.  bwtype Attribute Analysis

   This section specifies handling of specific bandwidth attributes when
   used in multiplexing scenarios.

6.1.  RFC4566 - SDP: Session Description Protocol

   +------------+-----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name       | Notes                             | Level | Category |
   +------------+-----------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | bwtype:CT  | Aggregate bandwidth for the       | S     | NORMAL   |
   |            | conference                        |       |          |
   |            |                                   |       |          |
   | bwtype:AS  | As a session attribute, it        | B     | NORMAL   |
   |            | specifies the session aggregate   |       |          |
   |            | unless media-level b=RR and/or    |       |          |
   |            | b=RS attributes are used.  Under  |       |          |
   |            | this interpretation the           |       |          |
   |            | multiplexing scheme has no impact |       |          |
   |            | and thus NORMAL category applies. |       |          |
   |            |                                   |       |          |
   | bwtype:AS  | For the media level usage,the     | B     | SUM      |
   |            | aggregate of individual bandwidth |       |          |
   |            | values is considered.             |       |          |
   |            |                                   |       |          |
   +------------+-----------------------------------+-------+----------+

                          RFC4566 bwtype Analysis

6.2.  RFC3556 - SDP Bandwidth Modifiers for RTCP Bandwidth

   RFC3556 [RFC3556] defines an extension to the Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) to specify two additional modifiers for the bandwidth
   attribute.  These modifiers may be used to specify the bandwidth
   allowed for RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets in a Real-time
   Transport Protocol (RTP) session















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 42]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------+--------------------------------+-------+-------------+
   | Name       | Notes                          | Level | Category    |
   +------------+--------------------------------+-------+-------------+
   | bwtype:RS  | Session level usage represents | B     | NORMAL,SUM  |
   |            | session aggregate and media    |       |             |
   |            | level usage indicates SUM of   |       |             |
   |            | the individual values while    |       |             |
   |            | multiplexing                   |       |             |
   |            |                                |       |             |
   | bwtype:RR  | Session level usage represents | B     | NORMAL,SUM  |
   |            | session aggregate and media    |       |             |
   |            | level usage indicates SUM of   |       |             |
   |            | the individual values while    |       |             |
   |            | multiplexing                   |       |             |
   |            |                                |       |             |
   +------------+--------------------------------+-------+-------------+

                          RFC3556 bwtype Analysis

6.3.  RFC3890 - Bandwidth Modifier for SDP

   RFC3890 [RFC3890] defines a Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   Transport Independent Application Specific Maximum (TIAS) bandwidth
   modifier that does not include transport overhead; instead an
   additional packet rate attribute is defined.  The transport
   independent bit-rate value together with the maximum packet rate can
   then be used to calculate the real bit-rate over the transport
   actually used.

   +--------------+---------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name         | Notes                           | Level | Category |
   +--------------+---------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | bwtype:TIAS  | The usage of TIAS is not        | B     | SPECIAL  |
   |              | clearly defined Offer/Answer    |       |          |
   |              | usage.                          |       |          |
   |              |                                 |       |          |
   | maxprate     | The usage of TIAS and maxprate  | B     | SPECIAL  |
   |              | is not well defined under       |       |          |
   |              | multiplexing                    |       |          |
   |              |                                 |       |          |
   +--------------+---------------------------------+-------+----------+

                          RFC3890 bwtype Analysis

   The intention of TIAS is that the media level bit-rate is multiplied
   with the known per-packet overhead for the selected transport and the
   maxprate value to determine the worst case bit-rate from the
   transport to more accurately capture the required usage.  Summing



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 43]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   TIAS values independently across m=lines and multiplying the computed
   sum with maxprate and the per-packet overhead would inflate the value
   significantly.  Instead performing multiplication and adding the
   individual values is a more appropriate usage.  This still ignores
   the fact that this is a send side declaration, and not intended for
   receiver negotiation.

7.  rtcp-fb Attribute Analysis

   This section analyzes rtcp-fb SDP attributes [RTCP-FB].

7.1.  RFC4585 - RTP/AVPF

   RFC4585 [RFC4585] defines an extension to the Audio-visual Profile
   (AVP) that enables receivers to provide, statistically, more
   immediate feedback to the senders and thus allows for short-term
   adaptation and efficient feedback-based repair mechanisms to be
   implemented.

   +----------+-----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Attr     | Notes                             | Level | Category   |
   | Name     |                                   |       |            |
   +----------+-----------------------------------+-------+------------+
   | ack rpsi | Not Impacted                      | M     | NORMAL     |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | ack app  | Feedback parameters MUST be       | M     | SPECIAL    |
   |          | handled in the app specific way   |       |            |
   |          | when multiplexed                  |       |            |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | nack     | Not Impacted                      | M     | NORMAL     |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | nack pli | Not Impacted                      | M     | NORMAL     |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | nack sli | Not Impacted                      | M     | NORMAL     |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | nack     | Not Impacted                      | M     | NORMAL     |
   | rpsi     |                                   |       |            |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | nack app | Feedback parameters MUST be       | M     | SPECIAL    |
   |          | handled in the app specific way   |       |            |
   |          | when multiplexed                  |       |            |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   | trr-int  | This attribute applies to RTP     | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |          | Session as a whole                |       |            |
   |          |                                   |       |            |
   +----------+-----------------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC4585 Attribute Analysis



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 44]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


7.2.  RFC5104 - Codec Control Messages in AVPF

   RFC5104 [RFC5104] specifies a few extensions to the messages defined
   in the Audio-Visual Profile with Feedback (AVPF).  They are helpful
   primarily in conversational multimedia scenarios where centralized
   multipoint functionalities are in use.  However, some are also usable
   in smaller multicast environments and point-to-point calls.

              +-----------+--------------+-------+----------+
              | Attr Name | Notes        | Level | Category |
              +-----------+--------------+-------+----------+
              | ccm       | Not Impacted | M     | Normal   |
              |           |              |       |          |
              +-----------+--------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5104 Attribute Analysis

7.3.  RFC6285 - Unicast-Based RAMS

             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | Name      | Notes         | Level | Category |
             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | nack rai  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
             |           |               |       |          |
             +-----------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6285 Attribute Analysis

7.4.  RFC6679 - ECN for RTP over UDP/IP

   RFC6679 [RFC6679] specifies how Explicit Congestion Notification
   (ECN) can be used with the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) running
   over UDP, using the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) as a feedback
   mechanism.  It defines a new RTCP Extended Report (XR) block for
   periodic ECN feedback, a new RTCP transport feedback message for
   timely reporting of congestion events, and a Session Traversal
   Utilities for NAT (STUN) extension used in the optional
   initialization method using Interactive Connectivity Establishment
   (ICE)












Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 45]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+
   | Name             | Notes                     | Level | Category   |
   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+
   | ecn-capable-rtp  | ECN markup are enabled at | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                  | the RTP Session level     |       |            |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   | nack ecn         | This attribute enables    | M     | IDENTICAL  |
   |                  | ECN at the RTP session    |       |            |
   |                  | level                     |       |            |
   |                  |                           |       |            |
   +------------------+---------------------------+-------+------------+

                        RFC6679 Attribute Analysis

7.5.  RFC6642 - Third-Party Loss Report

   In a large RTP session using the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) feedback
   mechanism defined in RFC 4585 [RFC4585], a feedback target may
   experience transient overload if some event causes a large number of
   receivers to send feedback at once.  This overload is usually avoided
   by ensuring that feedback reports are forwarded to all receivers,
   allowing them to avoid sending duplicate feedback reports.  However,
   there are cases where it is not recommended to forward feedback
   reports, and this may allow feedback implosion.  RFC6642 [RFC6642]
   memo discusses these cases and defines a new RTCP Third-Party Loss
   Report that can be used to inform receivers that the feedback target
   is aware of some loss event, allowing them to suppress feedback.
   Associated Session Description Protocol (SDP) signaling is also
   defined.

            +-------------+---------------+-------+----------+
            | Name        | Notes         | Level | Category |
            +-------------+---------------+-------+----------+
            | nack tllei  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
            |             |               |       |          |
            | nack pslei  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
            |             |               |       |          |
            +-------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC6642 Attribute Analysis

7.6.  RFC5104 - Codec Control Messages in AVPF









Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 46]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


             +------------+--------------+-------+----------+
             | Attr Name  | Notes        | Level | Category |
             +------------+--------------+-------+----------+
             | ccm fir    | Not Impacted | M     | NORMAL   |
             |            |              |       |          |
             | ccm tmmbr  | Not Impacted | M     | NORMAL   |
             |            |              |       |          |
             | ccm tstr   | Not Impacted | M     | NORMAL   |
             |            |              |       |          |
             | ccm vbcm   | Not Impacted | M     | NORMAL   |
             |            |              |       |          |
             +------------+--------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5104 Attribute Analysis

8.  group Attribute Analysis

   This section analyzes SDP "group" semantics [GROUP-SEM].

8.1.  RFC5888 - SDP Grouping Framework

   RFC5888 [RFC5888] defines a framework to group "m" lines in the
   Session Description Protocol (SDP) for different purposes.

             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | Name       | Notes         | Level | Category |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | group:LS   | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
             |            |               |       |          |
             | group:FID  | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
             |            |               |       |          |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5888 Attribute Analysis

8.2.  RFC3524 - Mapping Media Streams to Resource Reservation Flows

   RFC3524 [RFC3524] defines an extension to the Session Description
   Protocol (SDP) grouping framework.  It allows requesting a group of
   media streams to be mapped into a single resource reservation flow.
   The SDP syntax needed is defined, as well as a new "semantics"
   attribute called Single Reservation Flow (SRF).









Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 47]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | Name       | Notes         | Level | Category |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+
             | group:SRF  | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
             |            |               |       |          |
             +------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC3524 Attribute Analysis

8.3.  RFC4091 - ANAT Semantics

   RFC4091 [RFC4091] defines the Alternative Network Address Types
   (ANAT) semantics for the Session Description Protocol (SDP) grouping
   framework.  The ANAT semantics allow alternative types of network
   addresses to establish a particular media stream.

   +-------------+---------------------------+-------+-----------------+
   | Name        | Notes                     | Level | Category        |
   +-------------+---------------------------+-------+-----------------+
   | group:ANAT  | ANAT semantics is         | S     | NOT RECOMMENDED |
   |             | obseleted                 |       |                 |
   |             |                           |       |                 |
   +-------------+---------------------------+-------+-----------------+

                        RFC4091 Attribute Analysis

8.4.  RFC5956 - FEC Grouping Semantics in SDP

   RFC5956 [RFC5956] defines the semantics for grouping the associated
   source and FEC-based (Forward Error Correction) repair flows in the
   Session Description Protocol (SDP).  The semantics defined in the
   document are to be used with the SDP Grouping Framework (RFC 5888).
   These semantics allow the description of grouping relationships
   between the source and repair flows when one or more source and/or
   repair flows are associated in the same group, and they provide
   support for additive repair flows.  SSRC-level (Synchronization
   Source) grouping semantics are also defined in this document for
   Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) streams using SSRC multiplexing.

           +---------------+---------------+-------+----------+
           | Name          | Notes         | Level | Category |
           +---------------+---------------+-------+----------+
           | group:FEC-FR  | Not Impacted  | S     | NORMAL   |
           |               |               |       |          |
           +---------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5956 Attribute Analysis




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 48]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


8.5.  RFC5583 - Signaling Media Decoding Dependency in SDP

   RFC5583 [RFC5583] defines semantics that allow for signaling the
   decoding dependency of different media descriptions with the same
   media type in the Session Description Protocol (SDP).  This is
   required, for example, if media data is separated and transported in
   different network streams as a result of the use of a layered or
   multiple descriptive media coding process.

   +--------+------------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | Name   | Notes                        | Level | Category          |
   +--------+------------------------------+-------+-------------------+
   | depend | The attribute value must be  | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   | lay    | same for a given codec       |       |                   |
   |        | configuration                |       |                   |
   |        |                              |       |                   |
   | depend | The attribute value must be  | M     | IDENTICAL-PER-PT  |
   | mdc    | same for a given codec       |       |                   |
   |        | configuration                |       |                   |
   |        |                              |       |                   |
   +--------+------------------------------+-------+-------------------+

                        RFC5583 Attribute Analysis

   The usage of identical Payload Type values across multiplexed m=lines
   is described in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation].

9.  ssrc-group Attribute Analysis

   This section analyzes "ssrc-group" semantics [SSRC-GROUP].

9.1.  RFC5576 - Source-Specific SDP Attributes

              +---------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | Name    | Notes         | Level | Category |
              +---------+---------------+-------+----------+
              | FID     | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
              |         |               |       |          |
              | FEC     | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
              |         |               |       |          |
              | FEC-FR  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
              |         |               |       |          |
              +---------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5576 Attribute Analysis






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 49]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


10.  QoS Mechanism Token Analysis

   This section analyzes QoS tokes specified with SDP[QOS].

10.1.  RFC5432 - QoS Mechanism Selection in SDP

   +-------+----------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | Name  | Notes                                  | Level | Category |
   +-------+----------------------------------------+-------+----------+
   | rsvp  | Not Impacted, since QOS mechanisms are | B     | NORMAL   |
   |       | applied per flow.                      |       |          |
   |       |                                        |       |          |
   | nsis  | Not Impacted, since QOS mechanisms are | B     | NORMAL   |
   |       | applied per flow.                      |       |          |
   |       |                                        |       |          |
   +-------+----------------------------------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC5432 Attribute Analysis

11.  k= Attribute Analysis

11.1.  RFC4566 SDP: Session Description Protocol

   +------+------------------------------------+-------+---------------+
   | Name | Notes                              | Level | Category      |
   +------+------------------------------------+-------+---------------+
   | k=   | It is NOT recommended to use this  | S     | NOT           |
   |      | attribute                          |       | RECOMMENDED   |
   |      |                                    |       |               |
   +------+------------------------------------+-------+---------------+

                        RFC4566 Attribute Analysis

12.  content Atribute Analysis

12.1.  RFC4796















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 50]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


          +------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
          | Name             | Notes         | Level | Category |
          +------------------+---------------+-------+----------+
          | content:slides   | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
          |                  |               |       |          |
          | content:speaker  | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
          |                  |               |       |          |
          | content:main     | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
          |                  |               |       |          |
          | content:sl       | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
          |                  |               |       |          |
          | content:alt      | Not Impacted  | M     | NORMAL   |
          |                  |               |       |          |
          +------------------+---------------+-------+----------+

                        RFC4796 Attribute Analysis

13.  Payload Formats

13.1.  RFC5109 - RTP Payload Format for Generic FEC

   RFC5109 [RFC5109] describes a payload format for generic Forward
   Error Correction (FEC) for media data encapsulated in RTP.  It is
   based on the exclusive-or (parity) operation.  The payload format
   allows end systems to apply protection using various protection
   lengths and levels, in addition to using various protection group
   sizes to adapt to different media and channel characteristics.  It
   enables complete recovery of the protected packets or partial
   recovery of the critical parts of the payload depending on the packet
   loss situation.





















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 51]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   +---------------------+----------------------+-------+--------------+
   | Name                | Notes                | Level | Category     |
   +---------------------+----------------------+-------+--------------+
   | audio/ulpfec        | Not recommended for  | M     | NOT          |
   |                     | multiplexing due to  |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     | reuse of SSRCs       |       |              |
   |                     |                      |       |              |
   | video/ulpfec        | Not recommended for  | M     | NOT          |
   |                     | multiplexing due to  |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     | reuse of SSRCs       |       |              |
   |                     |                      |       |              |
   | text/ulpfec         | Not recommended for  | M     | NOT          |
   |                     | multiplexing due to  |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     | reuse of SSRCs       |       |              |
   |                     |                      |       |              |
   | application/ulpfec  | Not recommended for  | M     | NOT          |
   |                     | multiplexing due to  |       | RECOMMENDED  |
   |                     | reuse of SSRCs       |       |              |
   |                     |                      |       |              |
   +---------------------+----------------------+-------+--------------+

                      RFC5109 Payload Format Analysis

   Draft draft-lennox-payload-ulp-ssrc-mux proposes a simple fix to make
   it possible to use ULP with multiplexing and ULP is allowed when used
   with that.

14.  Multiplexing Media Streams and DSCP Markings

   Note: This section does not yet have WG consensus but is included as
   a proposal to the WG.  There are two options being proposed, A and B.
   The authors suggest A.

14.1.  Option A

   This section provides two rules for multiplexing multiple media
   streams with DSCP markings over a single 5-tuple.

      Rule 1: Media Streams with markings from different service classes
      MUST NOT be multiplexed.  For example, a media stream with DSCP
      Marking EF MUST NOT be multiplexed with a media stream marked with
      AF class.  Likewise, a media stream with DSCP marking AF3x MUST
      NOT be multiplexed with a media stream marked with AF4x.

      Rule 2: Media Streams that belong to the same service class, even
      with different drop precedence, MAY be multiplexed.  Thus media
      streams that all belong to the EF group or all that belong to the
      AF4X class can be multiplexed.



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 52]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   For WebRTC applications following the advice in
   [I-D.dhesikan-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos], the above rules end up allowing the
   audio and video to be multiplexed in many, but not all, cases.

14.2.  Option B

   Media Streams MAY be multiplexed regardless of what the setting of
   the DSCP Per Hop Behavior group (PHB).

15.  Multiplexing Considerations for Encapsulating Attributes

   This sections deals with recommendations for defining the
   multiplexing characteristics of the SDP attributes that encapsulate
   other SDP attributes/parameters.  Such attributes as of today, for
   example, are defined in [RFC3407], [RFC5939] and [RFC6871] as part of
   a generic framework for indicating and negotiating transport, media
   and media format related capabilities in the SDP.

   The behavior of such attributes under multiplexing is in turn defined
   by the multiplexing behavior of the attributes they encapsulate which
   are made known once the Offer/Answer negotiation process is
   completed.

15.1.  RFC3407 - cpar Attribute Analysis

   RFC3407 capability parameter attribute (a=cpar) encapsulates b=
   (bandwidth) or an a= attribute.  For bandwidth attribute
   encapsulation, the category SUM is inherited.  For the case of a=
   attribute, the category corresponding to the SDP attribute being
   referenced is inherited.

    v=0
    o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
    s=
    c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
    t=0 0
    m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 100
    a=rtpmap:100 VP8/90000
    a=sqn: 0
    a=cdsc: 1 video RTP/AVP 100
    a=cpar: a=rtcp-mux
    m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 101
    a=rtpmap:101 VP8/90000
    a=fmtp:100 max-fr=15;max-fs=1200
    a=cdsc: 2 video RTP/AVP 101
    a=cpar: a=rtcp-mux





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 53]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   In the above example ,the category IDENTICAL is inherited for the
   cpar encapsulated rtcp-mux attribute.

15.2.  RFC5939 Analysis

   [RFC5939] defines a general SDP capability negotiation framework.  It
   also specifies how to provide transport protocols and SDP attributes
   as capabilities and negotiate them using the framework.

   For this purpose, [RFC5939] defines the following

   o  A set of capabilities for the session and its associated media
      stream components, supported by each side.  The attribute
      ("a=acap") defines how to list an attribute name and its
      associated value (if any) as a capability.  The attribute
      ("a=tcap") that defines how to list transport protocols (e.g.,
      "RTP/AVP") as capabilities.

   o  A set of potential configurations indicating which combinations of
      those capabilities can be used for the session and its associated
      media stream components.  Potential configurations are not ready
      for use.  Instead, they provide an alternative that may be used,
      subject to further negotiation.

   o  An actual configuration for the session and its associated media
      stream components, that specifies which combinations of session
      parameters and media stream components can be used currently and
      with what parameters.  Use of an actual configuration does not
      require any further negotiation.

   o  A negotiation process that takes the set of actual and potential
      configurations (combinations of capabilities) as input and
      provides the negotiated actual configurations as output.

15.2.1.  Recommendations

   This section provides recommendations for entities generating and
   processing SDP under the generic capability negotiation framework as
   defined in [RFC5939] under the context of media stream multiplexing.

   These recommendations are provided for the purposes of enabling the
   Offerer to make sure that the generated potential configurations
   between the multiplexed streams can (easily) be negotiated to be
   consistent between those streams.







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 54]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


15.2.1.1.  Recommendation-1: Transport Capability Analysis

   When a transport capability is proposed as a potential configuration
   under a given media description, it is recommended that all the media
   descriptions under multiplexing have the same potential configuration
   number for the given transport capability.

   a=tcap:1 RTP/SAVPF
   a=tcap:2 RTP/SAVP
   a=group:BUNDLE audio video
   m= audio
   a=mid:audio
   a=pcfg:1 t=1
   a=pcfg:2
   m= video
   a=mid:video
   a=pcfg:1 t=1
   a=pcfg:2 t=2

   In the example above, the potential configurations that Offer
   transport protocol capability of RTP/SAVPF has the same configuration
   number "1" in both the audio and video media descriptions.

15.2.1.2.  Recommendation-2: Attribute Capability Analysis

   For attribute capabilities which are offered as potential
   configurations that encapsulate attributes whose value MUST be
   IDENTICAL under multiplexing, it is recommended that all the media
   descriptions under multiplexing have the same potential configuration
   number for the given attribute capability.

   a=acap:1 a=rtcp-mux
   a=acap:2 a=crypto:1 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80
          inline:EcGZiNWpFJhQXdspcl1ekcmVCNWpVLcfHAwJSoj|2^20|1:32
   a=group:BUNDLE audio video
   m= audio 49172 RTP/AVP 99
   a=mid:audio
   a=pcfg:1 a=1
   a=pcfg:2
   m= video 560024 RTP/AVP 100
   a=mid:video
   a=pcfg:1 a=1
   a=pcfg:2 a=2

   In the example above, the potential configuration number 1 is
   repeated while referring to attribute capability a=rtcp-mux, since
   the behavior is IDENTICAL for the attribute a=rtcp-mux under
   multiplexing.



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 55]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


15.2.1.3.  Recommendation-3: Sescap Attribute Analysis

   It is recommended that any bundled media descriptions/configurations
   are also acceptable combinations of media streams/configurations as
   specified by "sescap" attribute.

15.2.1.4.  Recommendation-4: Capability Extension Attributes

   Since it is nearly impossible to define a generic mechanism for
   various capability extensions , this document does't provide
   procedures for dealing with the capability extension attributes.
   However, Section Section 15.3 provide analysis of media capability
   extension attributes as defined in [RFC6871].

15.3.  RFC6871 Analysis

   [RFC6871] extends capability negotiation framework described in
   [RFC5939] by defining media capabilities that can be used to indicate
   and negotiate media types and their associated format parameters.

   Building upon the analysis from the previous section, following
   recommendation is provided for dealing with the attributes defined in
   [RFC6871] under multiplexing

15.3.1.  Recommendation-5: Attribute Capability Under Shared Payload
         Type

   For attribute capabilities which are offered as potential
   configurations that encapsulate attributes whose value MUST be
   IDENTICAL-PER-PT under multiplexing, it is recommended that all the
   media descriptions under multiplexing have the same potential
   configuration number for the given attribute capability

   The attributes (a=rmcap, a=mfcap) follow the above recommendations
   under mutliplexing
















Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 56]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   v=0
   o=- 25678 753849 IN IP4 192.0.2.1
   s=
   c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1
   t=0 0
   a=creq:med-v0
   m=audio 54322 RTP/AVP 96
   a=rtpmap:96 AMR-WB/16000/1
   a=fmtp:96 mode-change-capability=1; max-red=220;
   mode-set=0,2,4,7
   a=rmcap:1,3 audio AMR-WB/16000/1
   a=rmcap:2 audio AMR/8000/1
   a=mfcap:1,2 mode-change-capability=1
   a=mfcap:3 mode-change-capability=2
   a=pcfg:1 m=1 pt=1:96
   a=pcfg:2 m=2 pt=2:97
   a=pcfg:3 m=3 pt=3:98

   m=audio 54322 RTP/AVP 96
   a=rtpmap:96 AMR-WB/16000/1
   a=fmtp:96 mode-change-capability=1; max-red=220;
   mode-set=0,2,4,7
   a=rmcap:4 audio AMR/8000/1
   a=rmcap:5 audio OPUS/48000/2
   a=mfcap:5 minptime=40
   a=mfcap:4 mode-change-capability=1
   a=pcfg:1 m=4 pt=4:97
   a=pcfg:4 m=5 pt=5:101


   In the example above, the potential configuration number 1 is
   repeated when referring to media and media format capability used for
   the Payload Type 97.  This implies that both the media capability 2
   and 4 along with their media format capabilities MUST refer to the
   same Codec configuration , as per the definition of IDENTICAL-PER-PT

15.4.  Recommendation-6: Offer/Answer Negotiation Expectations

   For attributes encapsulated via "a=acap", "a=omcap", "a=mscap"
   capability attributes and presented as part of potential/actual
   configurations during the Offer/Answer negotiation prodecure, the
   negotiation MUST ensure that the multiplexing behavior of these
   capabilities inherit from the behavior of the attribute being
   encapsulated.

   Example 1: Below SDP example captures the following aspects.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 57]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   o  The Offerer offers audio and video streams with several different
      RTP profiles (AVP, SAVP, SAVPF) as potential configurations.

   o  Valid Answer that corresponds to the SDP answer where the Answerer
      accepts RTP/SAVPF as the default profile for both the media
      streams.  In this scenario both the media streams can be
      successfully multiplexed.

   o  Invalid Answer wherein the Answerer accepts the profile RTP/SAVPF
      for the audio stream and RTP/AVPF for the video stream.  This
      scenario results in the failure of the multiplexing as defined in
      the section 7.2 of the BUNDLE specification [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-
      bundle-negotiation].






































Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 58]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   <Offer-SDP>
   v=0
   o=- 25678 753849 IN IP4 192.0.2.1
   s=
   t=0 0
   c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1
   m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 98
   a=tcap:1 RTP/SAVPF
   a=rtpmap:98 OPUS/48000/2
   a=pcfg:1 t=1
   m=video 51372 RTP/AVP 101
   a=rtpmap:101 H264/90000
   a=tcap:2 RTP/SAVPF RTP/AVPF
   a=pcfg:2 t=2|3

   <Valid Answer>
   v=0
   o=- 24351 621814 IN IP4 192.0.2.2
   s=
   m=audio 3456 RTP/SAVPF 98
   a=rtpmap:98 OPUS/48000/2
   a=acfg:1 t=1

   m=video 51372 RTP/SAVPF 101
   a=rtpmap:101 H264/90000
   a=acfg:2 t=2

   <Invalid Answer>
   v=0
   o=- 24351 621814 IN IP4 192.0.2.2
   s=
   m=audio 3456 RTP/SAVPF 98
   a=rtpmap:98 OPUS/48000/2
   a=acfg:1 t=1

   m=video 51372 RTP/AVPF 101
   a=rtpmap:101 H264/90000
   a=acfg:2 t=3

16.  IANA Considerations

   IANA shall register categories from this specification by expanding
   the Session Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters table with a column
   listing categories against each SDP parameter.







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 59]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


                          +---------------------+
                          | Category            |
                          +---------------------+
                          | NORMAL              |
                          +---------------------+
                          | NOT RECOMMENDED     |
                          +---------------------+
                          | IDENTICAL           |
                          +---------------------+
                          | TRANSPORT           |
                          +---------------------+
                          | INHERIT             |
                          ----------------------+
                          | IDENTICAL-PER-PT    |
                          +---------------------+
                          | SPECIAL             |
                          ----------------------

17.  Security Considerations

   All the attributes which involve security key needs a careful review
   to ensure two-time pad vulnerability is not created.

18.  Acknowledgments

   I would like to thank Cullen Jennings for suggesting the categories,
   contributing text and reviewing the draft.  I would also link to
   thank Magnus, Christer, Jonathan Lennox, Bo Burman, and Dan on
   suggesting structural changes helping improve the document
   readability.

   I would like also to thank following experts on their inputs and
   reviews as listed - Flemming Andreasen(5.20,5.28,5.29,15), Rohan
   Mahy(5.45), Eric Burger(5.22),Christian Huitema(5.13), Christer
   Holmberg(5.17,5.22,5.40,5.41), Richard Ejzak (5.36,5.42,5.43,5.44),
   Colin Perkins(5.7,5.8), Magnus westerlund(5.2,5.3,5.9,5.26,
   5.27,6.1,6.2,6.3,8.3,7), Roni Evens(5.12,5.27,8.4), Subha
   Dhesikan(5.5,12.1,14), Dan Wing(5.6,5.11,5.30,5.34,5.37), Ali C
   Begen(5.1,5.16,5.18,5.21,5.33,8.2,8.4,13.1), Bo Burman (7.2,7.6),
   Charles Eckel(5.14,5.23,5.24,9.1,8.5), Paul Kyzivat(5.24), Ian
   Johansson(5.15), Saravanan Shanmugham(5.10), Paul E Jones(5.25),
   Rajesh Kumar(5.39), Jonathan Lennox(5.31,5,14,11.1), Mo
   Zanaty(5.4,5.19,8.1,8.3,8.5,12.1), Christian Huitema (5.13), Qin Wu
   (5.38 PM-Dir review).







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 60]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


19.  Change Log

   [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing]

   Changes from draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-01

   o  Updated section 15 to provide detailed recommendation on dealing
      with encapsulating attributes.  Also updated sections 5.20, 5.28,
      5.29 to refer to Section 15.

   o  Added new categories IDENTICAL-PER-PT and INHERIT

   o  Updated Sections 16 to add the new categories.

   o  Updated Sections 5.1, 5.14, 5.15, 5.38, 8.5 to reflect the
      category IDENTICAL-PER-PT.

   o  Reformatted section 4 to add individual categories to their own
      sections.

   Changes from draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-00

   o  Added Section 15 to provide recommendations on multiplexing SDP
      encapsulating attributes.  Also updated sections 5.20, 5.28, 5.29
      to refer to Section 15.

   o  Updated Section 5.38 to incorporate PM-dir review inputs from Qin
      Wu

   o  Updated Sections 5.2,5.14,8.5 to refer to BUNDLE draft for more
      clarity.

   o  Fixed few nits regarding sentence clarity and fill-in the NOTES
      section where information was lacking.

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-05

   o  Renamed the document to be a WG document.

   o  Added Section 14.

   o  Updated Open Issues based on IETF88 discussions.

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-04

   o  Added few OPEN ISSUES that needs to be discussed.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 61]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   o  Updated sections 5.10,5.23,5,24,5,25,7.2,9.1,5.12,5.27,8.4,
      5.44,5.11,5.4,5.19,10.1,10.5,5.21,10.4,15.1

   o  Updated Table Column name Current to Level and improved TRANSPORT
      category explanation on suggestions form Dan Wing.

   o  Grouped all the rtcp-fb attribute analysis under a single section
      as suggested by Magnus/

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-03

   o  Maintenance change to clean up grammatical nits and wordings.

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-02

   o  Updated Sections 5.3,5.5,5.6,5.7,5.9,5.8,5.11,5.13,5.22,5.34,
      5.37,5.40,5.41,5.42,5.43,5.44,5.45,6.1,6.2,6.3,8,3,12.1 based on
      the inputs from the respective RFC Authors.

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-01

   o  Replaced Category BAD with NOT RECOMMENDED.

   o  Added Category TBD.

   o  Updated IANA Consideration Section.

   Changes from draft-nandakumar-mmusic-mux-attributes-00

   o  Added new section for dealing with FEC payload types.

20.  References

20.1.  Normative References

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

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

20.2.  Informative References

   [ACK-NACK]
              "S Description Protocol (SDP) RTCP ACK/NACK Feedback
              attributes", <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-
              parameters/sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-15>.




Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 62]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [CCM]      "S Description Protocol (SDP) RTCP-FB Codec Control
              Messages", <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-
              parameters/sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-19>.

   [GROUP-SEM]
              "S Description Protocol (SDP) "group" semantics",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/
              sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-13>.

   [H.248.15]
              "Gateway control protocol: SDP H.248 package attribute",
              <http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.248.15>.

   [I-D.dhesikan-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos]
              Dhesikan, S., Druta, D., Jones, P., and J. Polk, "DSCP and
              other packet markings for RTCWeb QoS", draft-dhesikan-
              tsvwg-rtcweb-qos-02 (work in progress), July 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-avt-multiplexing-rtp]
              El-Khatib, K., Luo, G., Bochmann, G., and Pinjiang. Feng,
              "Multiplexing Scheme for RTP Flows between Access
              Routers", http://tools.ietf.org/html/
              draft-ietf-avt-multiplexing-rtp-01 (work in progress),
              October 1999.

   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]
              Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings,
              "Multiplexing Negotiation Using Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Port Numbers", draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-
              bundle-negotiation-03 (work in progress), February 2013.

   [IANA]     "S Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/
              sdp-parameters.xml>.

   [MEDIA_LOOPBACK]
              Kaplan, H., Hedayat, K., Venna, N., Jones, P., and N.
              Stratton, "An Extension to the Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) and Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) for
              Media Loopback", 6489 (work in progress), January 2013.

   [QOS]      "S Description Protocol (SDP) QoS Mechanism Tokens",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/
              sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-20>.







Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 63]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [R3GPPTS24.182]
              "IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Customized Alerting Tones
              (CAT); Protocol specification",
              <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/24182.htm>.

   [R3GPPTS24.183]
              "IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Customized Ringing Signal
              (CRS); Protocol specification",
              <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/24183.htm>.

   [R3GPPTS24.229]
              "IP multimedia call control protocol based on Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol
              (SDP);",
              <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/24229.htm>.

   [RFC3108]  Kumar, R. and M. Mostafa, "Conventions for the use of the
              Session Description Protocol (SDP) for ATM Bearer
              Connections", RFC 3108, May 2001.

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

   [RFC3407]  Andreasen, F., "S Description Protocol (SDP) Simple
              Capability Declaration", RFC 3407, October 2002.

   [RFC3524]  Camarillo, G. and A. Monrad, "Mapping of Media Streams to
              Resource Reservation Flows", RFC 3524, April 2003.

   [RFC3556]  Casner, S., "S Description Protocol (SDP) Bandwidth
              Modifiers for RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Bandwidth", RFC
              3556, July 2003.

   [RFC3605]  Huitema, C., "Real Time Control Protocol (RTCP) attribute
              in Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3605, October
              2003.

   [RFC3611]  Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control
              Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", RFC 3611, November
              2003.

   [RFC3890]  Westerlund, M., "A Transport Independent Bandwidth
              Modifier for the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC
              3890, September 2004.






Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 64]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [RFC4091]  Camarillo, G. and J. Rosenberg, "The Alternative Network
              Address Types (ANAT) Semantics for the Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Grouping Framework", RFC 4091, June 2005.

   [RFC4145]  Yon, D. and G. Camarillo, "TCP-Based Media Transport in
              the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4145,
              September 2005.

   [RFC4567]  Arkko, J., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., Norrman, K., and E.
              Carrara, "Key Management Extensions for Session
              Description Protocol (SDP) and Real Time Streaming
              Protocol (RTSP)", RFC 4567, July 2006.

   [RFC4568]  Andreasen, F., Baugher, M., and D. Wing, "S Description
              Protocol (SDP) Security Descriptions for Media Streams",
              RFC 4568, July 2006.

   [RFC4570]  Quinn, B. and R. Finlayson, "S Description Protocol (SDP)
              Source Filters", RFC 4570, July 2006.

   [RFC4572]  Lennox, J., "Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the
              Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol in the Session
              Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4572, July 2006.

   [RFC4574]  Levin, O. and G. Camarillo, "The Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Label Attribute", RFC 4574, August 2006.

   [RFC4583]  Camarillo, G., "S Description Protocol (SDP) Format for
              Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) Streams", RFC 4583,
              November 2006.

   [RFC4585]  Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey,
              "Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
              Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, July
              2006.

   [RFC4796]  Hautakorpi, J. and G. Camarillo, "The Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Content Attribute", RFC 4796, February
              2007.

   [RFC4975]  Campbell, B., Mahy, R., and C. Jennings, "The Message
              Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4975, September 2007.

   [RFC5104]  Wenger, S., Chandra, U., Westerlund, M., and B. Burman,
              "Codec Control Messages in the RTP Audio-Visual Profile
              with Feedback (AVPF)", RFC 5104, February 2008.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 65]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [RFC5109]  Li, A., "RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error
              Correction", RFC 5109, December 2007.

   [RFC5159]  Dondeti, L. and A. Jerichow, "S Description Protocol (SDP)
              Attributes for Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) Broadcast
              (BCAST) Service and Content Protection", RFC 5159, March
              2008.

   [RFC5245]  Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
              (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
              Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, July
              2006.

   [RFC5285]  Singer, D. and H. Desineni, "A General Mechanism for RTP
              Header Extensions", RFC 5285, July 2008.

   [RFC5432]  Polk, J., Dhesikan, S., and G. Camarillo, "Quality of
              Service (QoS) Mechanism Selection in the Session
              Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 5432, March 2009.

   [RFC5506]  Johansson, I., "Support for Reduced-Size Real-Time
              Transport Control Protocol (RTCP): Opportunities and
              Consequences", RFC 5506, April 2009.

   [RFC5547]  Garcia-Martin, M., Isomaki, M., Camarillo, G., Loreto, S.,
              and P. Kyzivat, "A Session Description Protocol (SDP)
              Offer/Answer Mechanism to Enable File Transfer", RFC 5547,
              May 2009.

   [RFC5576]  Lennox, J., Ott, J., and T. Schierl, "Source-Specific
              Media Attributes in the Session Description Protocol
              (SDP)", RFC 5576, June 2009.

   [RFC5583]  Schierl, T. and S. Wenger, "Signaling Media Decoding
              Dependency in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC
              5583, July 2009.

   [RFC5760]  Ott, J., Chesterfield, J., and E. Schooler, "RTP Control
              Protocol (RTCP) Extensions for Single-Source Multicast
              Sessions with Unicast Feedback", RFC 5760, February 2010.

   [RFC5761]  Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Multiplexing RTP Data and
              Control Packets on a Single Port", RFC 5761, April 2010.

   [RFC5762]  Perkins, C., "RTP and the Datagram Congestion Control
              Protocol (DCCP)", RFC 5762, April 2010.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 66]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [RFC5763]  Fischl, J., Tschofenig, H., and E. Rescorla, "Framework
              for Establishing a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
              (SRTP) Security Context Using Datagram Transport Layer
              Security (DTLS)", RFC 5763, May 2010.

   [RFC5888]  Camarillo, G. and H. Schulzrinne, "The Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Grouping Framework", RFC 5888, June 2010.

   [RFC5939]  Andreasen, F., "S Description Protocol (SDP) Capability
              Negotiation", RFC 5939, September 2010.

   [RFC5956]  Begen, A., "Forward Error Correction Grouping Semantics in
              the Session Description Protocol", RFC 5956, September
              2010.

   [RFC6064]  Westerlund, M. and P. Frojdh, "SDP and RTSP Extensions
              Defined for 3GPP Packet-Switched Streaming Service and
              Multimedia Broadcast/Multicast Service", RFC 6064, January
              2011.

   [RFC6128]  Begen, A., "RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Port for Source-
              Specific Multicast (SSM) Sessions", RFC 6128, February
              2011.

   [RFC6189]  Zimmermann, P., Johnston, A., and J. Callas, "ZRTP: Media
              Path Key Agreement for Unicast Secure RTP", RFC 6189,
              April 2011.

   [RFC6193]  Saito, M., Wing, D., and M. Toyama, "Media Description for
              the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE) in the Session
              Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 6193, April 2011.

   [RFC6230]  Boulton, C., Melanchuk, T., and S. McGlashan, "Media
              Control Channel Framework", RFC 6230, May 2011.

   [RFC6236]  Johansson, I. and K. Jung, "Negotiation of Generic Image
              Attributes in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC
              6236, May 2011.

   [RFC6284]  Begen, A., Wing, D., and T. Van Caenegem, "Port Mapping
              between Unicast and Multicast RTP Sessions", RFC 6284,
              June 2011.

   [RFC6285]  Ver Steeg, B., Begen, A., Van Caenegem, T., and Z. Vax,
              "Unicast-Based Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP
              Sessions", RFC 6285, June 2011.





Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 67]


Internet-Draft         SDP Attribute Multiplexing              July 2014


   [RFC6364]  Begen, A., "S Description Protocol Elements for the
              Forward Error Correction (FEC) Framework", RFC 6364,
              October 2011.

   [RFC6642]  Wu, Q., Xia, F., and R. Even, "RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)
              Extension for a Third-Party Loss Report", RFC 6642, June
              2012.

   [RFC6679]  Westerlund, M., Johansson, I., Perkins, C., O'Hanlon, P.,
              and K. Carlberg, "Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN)
              for RTP over UDP", RFC 6679, August 2012.

   [RFC6714]  Holmberg, C., Blau, S., and E. Burger, "Connection
              Establishment for Media Anchoring (CEMA) for the Message
              Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 6714, August 2012.

   [RFC6773]  Phelan, T., Fairhurst, G., and C. Perkins, "DCCP-UDP: A
              Datagram Congestion Control Protocol UDP Encapsulation for
              NAT Traversal", RFC 6773, November 2012.

   [RFC6787]  Burnett, D. and S. Shanmugham, "Media Resource Control
              Protocol Version 2 (MRCPv2)", RFC 6787, November 2012.

   [RFC6871]  Gimlan, R., Evan, R., and F. Andreasen, "Session
              Description Protocol (SDP) Media Capabilities
              Negotiation", RFC 6871, Febrauary 2013.

   [RTCP-FB]  "S Description Protocol (SDP) RTCP Feedback attributes",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/
              sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-14>.

   [SSRC-GROUP]
              "S Description Protocol (SDP) "ssrc-group" semantics",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/
              sdp-parameters.xml#sdp-parameters-17>.

   [T.38]     "Procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile communication
              over IP networks", <http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-T.38/e>.

Author's Address

   Suhas Nandakumar
   Cisco
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: snandaku@cisco.com



Nandakumar               Expires January 4, 2015               [Page 68]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/