draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-00.txt   draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-01.txt 
Audio/Video Transport Working Group G. Hunt Audio/Video Transport Working Group G. Hunt
Internet-Draft Unaffiliated Internet-Draft Unaffiliated
Intended status: Standards Track A. Clark Intended status: Standards Track A. Clark
Expires: April 19, 2012 Telchemy Expires: June 11, 2012 Telchemy
G. Zorn, Ed. G. Zorn
Network Zen Network Zen
Q. Wu Q. Wu
Huawei Huawei
October 17, 2011 December 9, 2011
RTCP XR Report Block for Discard metric Reporting RTCP XR Report Block for Discard metric Reporting
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-00.txt draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-01.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block that allows the This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block that allows the
reporting of a simple discard count metric for use in a range of RTP reporting of a simple discard count metric for use in a range of RTP
applications. applications.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
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 19, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 11, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 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 3, line 34 skipping to change at page 3, line 34
1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports 1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports
The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550]. [RFC3611] The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550]. [RFC3611]
defined an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended defined an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended
Report (XR). This draft defines a new Extended Report block that Report (XR). This draft defines a new Extended Report block that
MUST be used as defined in [RFC3550] and [RFC3611]. MUST be used as defined in [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework 1.3. Performance Metrics Framework
The Performance Metrics Framework [PMOLFRAME] provides guidance on The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the
the definition and specification of performance metrics. Metrics definition and specification of performance metrics. Metrics
described in this draft either reference external definitions or described in this draft either reference external definitions or
define metrics generally in accordance with the guidelines in define metrics generally in accordance with the guidelines in
[PMOLFRAME]. [RFC6390].
1.4. Applicability 1.4. Applicability
This metric is believed to be applicable to a large class of RTP This metric is believed to be applicable to a large class of RTP
applications which use a jitter buffer. applications which use a jitter buffer.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
2.1. Standards Language 2.1. Standards Language
skipping to change at page 4, line 28 skipping to change at page 4, line 28
implementation-specific time window. A packet that arrives within implementation-specific time window. A packet that arrives within
this time window but is too early or late to be played out shall this time window but is too early or late to be played out shall
be regarded as discarded. A packet shall be classified as one of be regarded as discarded. A packet shall be classified as one of
received (or OK), discarded or lost. The Discard Metric counts received (or OK), discarded or lost. The Discard Metric counts
only discarded packets. The metric "cumulative number of packets only discarded packets. The metric "cumulative number of packets
lost" defined in [RFC3550] reports a count of packets lost from lost" defined in [RFC3550] reports a count of packets lost from
the media stream (single SSRC within single RTP session). the media stream (single SSRC within single RTP session).
Similarly the metric "number of packets discarded" reports a count Similarly the metric "number of packets discarded" reports a count
of packets discarded from the media stream (single SSRC within of packets discarded from the media stream (single SSRC within
single RTP session) arriving at the receiver. Another metric single RTP session) arriving at the receiver. Another metric
defined in [POSTREPAIRLOSS] is available to report on packets defined in [RFC5725] is available to report on packets which are
which are not recovered by any repair techniques which may be in not recovered by any repair techniques which may be in use.
use.
3. Discard Metric Report Block 3. Discard Metric Report Block
3.1. Report Block Structure 3.1. Report Block Structure
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=NBGD |I| resv. | block length = 2 | | BT=NBGD | I |E| resv. | block length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of Source | | SSRC of Source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| number of packets discarded | | number of packets discarded |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Report Block Structure Figure 1: Report Block Structure
3.2. Definition of Fields in Discard Metric Report Block 3.2. Definition of Fields in Discard Metric Report Block
Block type (BT): 8 bits Block type (BT): 8 bits
A Discard Metric Report Block is identified by the constant ND. A Discard Metric Report Block is identified by the constant ND.
[Note to RFC Editor: please replace ND with the IANA provided RTCP [Note to RFC Editor: please replace ND with the IANA provided RTCP
XR block type for this block.] XR block type for this block.]
Interval Metric flag (I): 1 bit Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits
This field is used to indicate whether the Packet Delay Variation This field is used to indicate whether the Basic Loss/Discard
metrics block is an Interval or a Cumulative report, that is, metrics are sampled,Interval or Cumulative metrics, that is,
whether the reported values apply to the most recent measurement whether the reported values applies to the most recent measurement
interval duration between successive metrics reports (I=1) (the interval duration between successive metrics reports (I=10) (the
Interval Duration) or to the accumulation period characteristic of Interval Duration) or to the accumulation period characteristic of
cumulative measurements (I=0) (the Cumulative Duration). cumulative measurements (I=11) (the Cumulative Duration) or to the
value of a continuously measured or calculated that has been
sampled at end of the interval (I=01) (Sampled Value).
Reserved (resv): 7 bits Early indication flag (E): 1bit
This field is used to indicate whether packets are discarded due
to early arrival or due to late arrival. This field MUST be set
to '1' if packets are discarded due to too early arrival and MUST
be set to '0' otherwise.
Reserved (resv): 5 bits
These bits are reserved. They SHOULD be set to zero by senders These bits are reserved. They SHOULD be set to zero by senders
and MUST be ignored by receivers. and MUST be ignored by receivers.
block length: 16 bits block length: 16 bits
The length of this report block in 32-bit words, minus one. For The length of this report block in 32-bit words, minus one. For
the Delay block, the block length is equal to 2. the Delay block, the block length is equal to 2.
SSRC of source: 32 bits SSRC of source: 32 bits
skipping to change at page 12, line 5 skipping to change at page 11, line 13
Ravi Raviraj, Albrecht Schwarz, Tom Taylor, and Hideaki Yamada. Ravi Raviraj, Albrecht Schwarz, Tom Taylor, and Hideaki Yamada.
8. Changes from previous version 8. Changes from previous version
Changed BNF for SDP following Christian Groves' and Tom Taylor's Changed BNF for SDP following Christian Groves' and Tom Taylor's
comments (4th and 5th May 2009), now aligned with RFC 5234 section comments (4th and 5th May 2009), now aligned with RFC 5234 section
3.3 "Incremental Alternatives". 3.3 "Incremental Alternatives".
Updated references. Updated references.
Allocate 1 bit to distinguish early discard from later discard.
Expand Interval Metric flag to 2 bit to allow using sampled metric.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", March 1997. Requirement Levels", March 1997.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time [RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003. Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003.
[RFC3611] Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control [RFC3611] Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control
Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", November 2003. Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", November 2003.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", July 2006. Description Protocol", July 2006.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[DISCARD] Hunt, G., "RTCP XR Report Block for Discard metric
Reporting", ID draft-ietf-rtcp-xr-discard-02, May 2009.
[MONARCH] Wu, Q., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP", [MONARCH] Wu, Q., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP",
ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04, August 2011. ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-04, August 2011.
[PMOLFRAME]
Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric
Development", ID draft-ietf-pmol-metrics-framework-12,
July 2011.
[POSTREPAIRLOSS]
Hunt, G., "RTCP XR Report Block for Post-Repair Loss
metric Reporting",
ID draft-ietf-rtcp-xr-postrepair-loss-02, May 2009.
[RFC4588] Rey, J., "RTP Retransmission Payload Format", RFC 4588, [RFC4588] Rey, J., "RTP Retransmission Payload Format", RFC 4588,
July 2006. July 2006.
[RFC5109] Li, A., "RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error [RFC5109] Li, A., "RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error
Correction", RFC 5109, July 2006. Correction", RFC 5109, July 2006.
[RFC5725] Begen, A., "RTCP XR Report Block for Post-Repair Loss
metric Reporting",
ID draft-ietf-rtcp-xr-postrepair-loss-02, February 2010.
[RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric
Development", RFC 6390, October 2011.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Geoff Hunt Geoff Hunt
Unaffiliated Unaffiliated
Email: r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com Email: r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com
Alan Clark Alan Clark
Telchemy Incorporated Telchemy Incorporated
2905 Premiere Parkway, Suite 280 2905 Premiere Parkway, Suite 280
Duluth, GA 30097 Duluth, GA 30097
USA USA
Email: alan.d.clark@telchemy.com Email: alan.d.clark@telchemy.com
Glen Zorn (editor) Glen Zorn
Network Zen Network Zen
77/440 Soi Phoomjit, Rama IV Road 77/440 Soi Phoomjit, Rama IV Road
Phra Khanong, Khlong Toie Phra Khanong, Khlong Toie
Bangkok 10110 Bangkok 10110
Thailand Thailand
Phone: +66 (0) 87 502 4274 Phone: +66 (0) 87 502 4274
Email: gwz@net-zen.net Email: gwz@net-zen.net
Qin Wu Qin Wu
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
33 lines changed or deleted 39 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/