draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt   draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-08.txt 
XR Block Working Group J. Ott XR Block Working Group J. Ott
Internet-Draft V. Singh, Ed. Internet-Draft V. Singh, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Aalto University Intended status: Standards Track Aalto University
Expires: April 04, 2014 I. Curcio Expires: May 08, 2014 I. Curcio
Nokia Research Center Nokia Research Center
October 01, 2013 November 04, 2013
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) for Run Length Encoding RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) for Run Length Encoding
(RLE) of Discarded Packets (RLE) of Discarded Packets
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-08
Abstract Abstract
The RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) is used in conjunction with the Real- The RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) is used in conjunction with the Real-
time Transport Protocol (RTP) in to provide a variety of short-term time Transport Protocol (RTP) in to provide a variety of short-term
and long-term reception statistics. The available reporting may and long-term reception statistics. The available reporting may
include aggregate information across longer periods of time as well include aggregate information across longer periods of time as well
as individual packet reporting. This document specifies a per-packet as individual packet reporting. This document specifies a per-packet
report metric capturing individual packets discarded from the de- report metric capturing individual packets discarded from the de-
jitter buffer after successful reception. jitter buffer after successful reception.
skipping to change at page 1, line 39 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 04, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 08, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 16 skipping to change at page 2, line 16
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. XR Discard RLE Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. XR Discard RLE Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Protocol Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Protocol Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Reporting Node (Receiver) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. Reporting Node (Receiver) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Media Sender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.2. Media Sender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. SDP signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. SDP signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. XR Report Block Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.1. XR Report Block Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.2. SDP Parameter Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.2. SDP Parameter Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.3. Contact information for IANA registrations . . . . . . . 8 7.3. Contact information for IANA registrations . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template . . . . . 9 Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template . . . . . 9
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
B.1. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.1. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 metrics-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
B.2. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.2. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
skipping to change at page 2, line 46 skipping to change at page 2, line 46
B.4. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.4. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 metrics-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
B.5. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.5. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 metrics-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.6. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.6. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 metrics-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.7. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.7. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 metrics-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.8. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle- B.8. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 metrics-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.9. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-
metrics-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
RTP [RFC3550] provides a transport for real-time media flows such as RTP [RFC3550] provides a transport for real-time media flows such as
audio and video together with the RTP control protocol (RTCP) which audio and video together with the RTP control protocol (RTCP) which
provides periodic feedback about the media streams received in a provides periodic feedback about the media streams received in a
specific duration. In addition, RTCP can be used for timely feedback specific duration. In addition, RTCP can be used for timely feedback
about individual events to report (e.g., packet loss) [RFC4585]. about individual events to report (e.g., packet loss) [RFC4585].
Both long-term and short-term feedback enable a media sender to adapt Both long-term and short-term feedback enable a media sender to adapt
its media transmission and/or encoding dynamically to the observed its media transmission and/or encoding dynamically to the observed
path characteristics. path characteristics.
RFC3611 [RFC3611] defines RTCP Extended Reports as a detailed RFC3611 [RFC3611] defines RTCP Extended Reports as a detailed
skipping to change at page 3, line 38 skipping to change at page 3, line 40
See section 4.7.1 of RFC3611 [RFC3611]. The discard metric is See section 4.7.1 of RFC3611 [RFC3611]. The discard metric is
believed to be applicable to a large class of RTP applications which believed to be applicable to a large class of RTP applications which
use a de-jitter buffer RFC5481 [RFC5481]. use a de-jitter buffer RFC5481 [RFC5481].
Recently proposed extensions to the Extended Reports (XR) reporting Recently proposed extensions to the Extended Reports (XR) reporting
suggest enhancing this discard metric: suggest enhancing this discard metric:
o Reporting the number of discarded packets in a measurement o Reporting the number of discarded packets in a measurement
interval, i.e., during either the last reporting interval or since interval, i.e., during either the last reporting interval or since
the beginning of the session, as indicated by a flag in the the beginning of the session, as indicated by a flag in the
suggested XR report [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard]. If an suggested XR report [RFC7002]. If an endpoint needs to report
endpoint needs to report packet discard due to other reasons than packet discard due to other reasons than early- and late-arrival
early- and late-arrival (for example, discard due to duplication, (for example, discard due to duplication, redundancy, etc.) then
redundancy, etc.) then it should consider using the Discarded it should consider using the Discarded Packets Report Block
Packets Report Block [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard]. [RFC7002].
o Reporting gaps and bursts of discarded packets during a o Reporting gaps and bursts of discarded packets during a
measurement interval, i.e., the last reporting interval or the measurement interval, i.e., the last reporting interval or the
duration of the session duration of the session [RFC7003].
[I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard].
o Reporting the sum of payload bytes discarded during a measurement o Reporting the sum of payload bytes discarded during a measurement
interval, i.e., the last reporting interval or the duration of the interval, i.e., the last reporting interval or the duration of the
session [I-D.singh-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric]. session [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric].
However, none of these metrics allow a receiver to report precisely However, none of these metrics allow a receiver to report precisely
which packets were discarded. While this information could in theory which packets were discarded. While this information could in theory
be derived from high-frequency reporting on the number of discarded be derived from high-frequency reporting on the number of discarded
packets [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard] or from the gap/burst packets [RFC7002] or from the gap/burst report [RFC7003], these two
report [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard], these two
mechanisms do not appear feasible: The former would require an unduly mechanisms do not appear feasible: The former would require an unduly
high amount of reporting which still might not be sufficient due to high amount of reporting which still might not be sufficient due to
the non-deterministic scheduling of RTCP packets. The latter incur the non-deterministic scheduling of RTCP packets. The latter incur
significant complexity and reporting overhead and might still not significant complexity and reporting overhead and might still not
deliver the desired accuracy. deliver the desired accuracy.
This document defines a discard report block following the idea of This document defines a discard report block following the idea of
the run-length encoding applied for lost and received packets in the run-length encoding applied for lost and received packets in
[RFC3611]. [RFC3611].
skipping to change at page 4, line 40 skipping to change at page 4, line 43
3. XR Discard RLE Report Block 3. XR Discard RLE Report Block
The XR Discard RLE report block uses the same format as specified for The XR Discard RLE report block uses the same format as specified for
the loss and duplicate report blocks in [RFC3611]. Figure 1 the loss and duplicate report blocks in [RFC3611]. Figure 1
describes the packet format. The fields "BT", "T", "block length", describes the packet format. The fields "BT", "T", "block length",
"SSRC of source", "begin_seq", and "end_seq" have the same semantics "SSRC of source", "begin_seq", and "end_seq" have the same semantics
and representation as defined in [RFC3611], with the addition of the and representation as defined in [RFC3611], with the addition of the
"E" flag to indicate the reason for discard. The "chunks" encoding "E" flag to indicate the reason for discard. The "chunks" encoding
the run length have the same representation as in RFC3611, but encode the run length have the same representation as in RFC3611, but encode
discarded packets. A definition of a discarded packet is given in discarded packets. A definition of a discarded packet is given in
[I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard]. [RFC7002].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BT=DRLE |rsvd |E| T | block length | | BT=DRLE |rsvd |E| T | block length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of source | | SSRC of source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| begin_seq | end_seq | | begin_seq | end_seq |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 6, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 12
This section describes the behavior of the reporting node (= media This section describes the behavior of the reporting node (= media
receiver) and the media sender. receiver) and the media sender.
4.1. Reporting Node (Receiver) 4.1. Reporting Node (Receiver)
Transmission of RTCP XR Discard RLE Reports is up to the discretion Transmission of RTCP XR Discard RLE Reports is up to the discretion
of the media receiver, as is the reporting granularity. However, it of the media receiver, as is the reporting granularity. However, it
is RECOMMENDED that the media receiver signals all discarded packets is RECOMMENDED that the media receiver signals all discarded packets
using the method defined in this document. If all packets over a using the method defined in this document. If all packets over a
reporting period were discarded, the media receiver MAY use the reporting period were discarded, the media receiver MAY use the
Discard Report Block [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard] instead. In Discard Report Block [RFC7002] instead. In case of limited available
case of limited available reporting bandwidth, it is up to the reporting bandwidth, it is up to the receiver whether or not to
receiver whether or not to include RTCP XR Discard RLE reports. include RTCP XR Discard RLE reports.
The media receiver MAY send the Discard RLE Reports as part of the The media receiver MAY send the Discard RLE Reports as part of the
regularly scheduled RTCP packets as per RFC3550. It MAY also include regularly scheduled RTCP packets as per RFC3550. It MAY also include
Discard RLE Reports in immediate or early feedback packets as per Discard RLE Reports in immediate or early feedback packets as per
RFC4585. RFC4585.
4.2. Media Sender 4.2. Media Sender
The media sender MUST be prepared to operate without receiving any The media sender MUST be prepared to operate without receiving any
Discard RLE reports. If Discard RLE reports are generated by the Discard RLE reports. If Discard RLE reports are generated by the
skipping to change at page 8, line 40 skipping to change at page 8, line 47
2003. 2003.
[RFC4585] Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey, [RFC4585] Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey,
"Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control "Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, July Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, July
2006. 2006.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006. Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
[I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard] [RFC7002] Clark, A., Zorn, G., and Q. Wu, "RTP Control Protocol
Clark, A., Zorn, G., and W. Wu, "RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Discard Count Metric
(RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Discard Count metric Reporting", RFC 7002, September 2013.
Reporting", draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-15 (work in
progress), June 2013.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard] [RFC7003] Clark, A., Huang, R., and Q. Wu, "RTP Control Protocol
Clark, A., Huang, R., and W. Wu, "RTP Control (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Burst/Gap Discard
Protocol(RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Burst/Gap Metric Reporting", RFC 7003, September 2013.
Discard metric Reporting", draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-
burst-gap-discard-14 (work in progress), April 2013.
[RFC5481] Morton, A. and B. Claise, "Packet Delay Variation [RFC5481] Morton, A. and B. Claise, "Packet Delay Variation
Applicability Statement", RFC 5481, March 2009. Applicability Statement", RFC 5481, March 2009.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. [RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, March 2004. RFC 3711, March 2004.
[RFC5124] Ott, J. and E. Carrara, "Extended Secure RTP Profile for [RFC5124] Ott, J. and E. Carrara, "Extended Secure RTP Profile for
Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback
skipping to change at page 9, line 27 skipping to change at page 9, line 31
Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Securing the RTP Protocol Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Securing the RTP Protocol
Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media
Security Solution", draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-13 Security Solution", draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-13
(work in progress), May 2013. (work in progress), May 2013.
[I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options] [I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options]
Westerlund, M. and C. Perkins, "Options for Securing RTP Westerlund, M. and C. Perkins, "Options for Securing RTP
Sessions", draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options-04 Sessions", draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options-04
(work in progress), July 2013. (work in progress), July 2013.
[I-D.singh-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric] [I-D.ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric]
Singh, V., Ott, J., and I. Curcio, "RTP Control Protocol Singh, V., Ott, J., and I. Curcio, "RTP Control Protocol
(RTCP) Extended Reports (XR) for Bytes Discarded Metric", (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) for Bytes Discarded Metric",
draft-singh-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00 draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00 (work
(work in progress), August 2013. in progress), October 2013.
Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template
RFC EDITOR NOTE: please change XXXX in [RFCXXXX] by the new RFC RFC EDITOR NOTE: please change XXXX in [RFCXXXX] by the new RFC
number, when assigned. number, when assigned.
a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded Packets Metric a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric
* Metric Name: Discard Run-length encoding Metric * Metric Name: Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP
Packets Metric.
* Metric Description: Instances of packets discarded over the * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over
period covered by this report. the period covered by this report.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3, for the * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3, for the
definition of Discard RLE [RFCXXXX] and section 4.1 of RFC3611 definition of Discard RLE [RFCXXXX] and section 4.1 of RFC3611
for Run-length encoding. for Run-length encoding.
* Units of Measurement: Every packet in the interval is reported * Units of Measurement: Every RTP packet in the interval is
as discarded or not. See section 3 for the definition of reported as discarded or not. See section 3 for the
Discard RLE [RFCXXXX]. definition of [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: The * Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: The
measurement of these metrics is made at the receiving end of measurement of these metrics is made at the receiving end of
the RTP stream. the RTP stream.
* Measurement Timing: Each packet between a beginning sequence * Measurement Timing: Each RTP packet between a beginning
number (begin_seq) and ending sequence number (end_seq) are sequence number (begin_seq) and ending sequence number
reported as discarded or not. See section 3 for the (end_seq) are reported as discarded or not. See section 3 for
definition of Discard RLE [RFCXXXX]. the definition of Discard RLE [RFCXXXX].
* Use and applications: See section 1, paragraph 1 of [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1, paragraph 1 of [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
Appendix B. Change Log Appendix B. Change Log
Note to the RFC-Editor: please remove this section prior to Note to the RFC-Editor: please remove this section prior to
publication as an RFC. publication as an RFC.
skipping to change at page 11, line 32 skipping to change at page 11, line 32
o Editorial fixes based on Security and PM directorate. o Editorial fixes based on Security and PM directorate.
o Split bytes discarded from this draft to another. o Split bytes discarded from this draft to another.
o Updated Security Considerations Section. o Updated Security Considerations Section.
o This draft now normatively cites the definition of discards in o This draft now normatively cites the definition of discards in
'packets discarded' draft. 'packets discarded' draft.
B.9. changes in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-08
o Editorial fixes: Updated references from drafts to RFCs.
o Updated RFC6390 template with RTP keyword.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Joerg Ott Joerg Ott
Aalto University Aalto University
School of Electrical Engineering School of Electrical Engineering
Otakaari 5 A Otakaari 5 A
Espoo, FIN 02150 Espoo, FIN 02150
Finland Finland
Email: jo@comnet.tkk.fi Email: jo@comnet.tkk.fi
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
46 lines changed or deleted 48 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/