draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02.txt   draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03.txt 
Network Working Group G. Hunt Network Working Group A. Clark
Internet-Draft Unaffiliated Internet-Draft Telchemy
Intended status: Standards Track A. Clark Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu
Expires: January 14, 2013 Telchemy Expires: April 21, 2013 Huawei
Q. Wu
Huawei
R. Schott R. Schott
DT DT
G. Zorn G. Zorn
Network Zen Network Zen
July 13, 2012 October 18, 2012
RTCP XR Blocks for QoE Metric Reporting RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Blocks for QoE Metric
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 Reporting
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03
Abstract Abstract
This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block including two new This document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report
segment types and associated SDP parameters that allow the reporting (XR) Block including two new segment types and associated SDP
of QoE metrics for use in a range of RTP applications. parameters that allow the reporting of QoE metrics for use in a range
of RTP 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
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 January 14, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 21, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 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 24 skipping to change at page 2, line 24
1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.3. Performance Metrics Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. QoE Metrics Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. QoE Metrics Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Metric Block Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Metric Block Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Definition of Fields in QoE Metrics Block . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Definition of Fields in QoE Metrics Block . . . . . . . . 6
3.2.1. Single Stream per SSRC Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.1. Single Stream per SSRC Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.2. Multi-Channel audio per SSRC Segment . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.2. Multi-Channel audio per SSRC Segment . . . . . . . . . 9
4. SDP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. SDP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. New RTCP XR Block Type value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.1. New RTCP XR Block Type value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2. New RTCP XR SDP Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2. New RTCP XR SDP Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3. Contact information for registrations . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3. Contact information for registrations . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4. New registry of calculation algorithms for single 5.4. New registry of calculation algorithms for single
stream segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 stream segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5. New registry of calculation algorithms for 5.5. New registry of calculation algorithms for
multi-channel audio segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 multi-channel audio segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7. Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
1.1. QoE Metrics Report Block 1.1. QoE Metrics Report Block
This document defines a new block type to augment those defined in This document defines a new block type to augment those defined in
[RFC3611], for use in a range of RTP applications. [RFC3611], for use in a range of RTP applications.
The new block type provides information on multimedia quality using The new block type provides information on multimedia quality using
one of several standard metrics. one of several standard metrics.
The metrics belong to the class of application level metrics defined The metrics belong to the class of application level metrics defined
in [MONARCH]. in [MONARCH].
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 document defines a new Extended Report block. The Report (XR). This draft defines a new Extended Report block for use
use of Extended Report blocks is defined by [RFC3611]. with [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework 1.3. Performance Metrics Framework
The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the
definition and specification of performance metrics. Metrics definition and specification of performance metrics. The RTP
described in this draft either reference external definitions or Monitoring Architectures [MONARCH] provides guideline for reporting
define metrics generally in accordance with the guidelines in block format using RTCP XR. The XR Block described in this document
[RFC6390]. are in accordance with the guidelines in [RFC6390] and [MONARCH].
1.4. Applicability 1.4. Applicability
The QoE Metrics Report Block can be used in any application of RTP The QoE Metrics Report Block can be used in any application of RTP
for which QoE measurement algorithms are defined. for which QoE measurement algorithms are defined.
The factors that affect real-time AV application quality can be split The factors that affect real-time AV application quality can be split
into two categories. The first category consists of transport- into two categories. The first category consists of transport-
dependent factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter (which also dependent factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter (which also
translates into losses in the playback buffer). The factors in the translates into losses in the playback buffer). The factors in the
skipping to change at page 5, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 22
service. Multimedia application QoE metric is commonly expressed as service. Multimedia application QoE metric is commonly expressed as
a MOS ("Mean Opinion Score"), MOS is on a scale from 1 to 5, in which a MOS ("Mean Opinion Score"), MOS is on a scale from 1 to 5, in which
5 represents excellent and 1 represents unacceptable. MOS scores are 5 represents excellent and 1 represents unacceptable. MOS scores are
usually obtained using subjective testing or using objective usually obtained using subjective testing or using objective
algorithm. However Subjective testing to estimate the multimedia algorithm. However Subjective testing to estimate the multimedia
quality may be not suitable for measuring the multimedia quality quality may be not suitable for measuring the multimedia quality
since the results may vary from test to test. Therefore using since the results may vary from test to test. Therefore using
objective algorithm to calculate MOS scores is recommended. ITU-T objective algorithm to calculate MOS scores is recommended. ITU-T
recommendations define the methodologies for assessment of the recommendations define the methodologies for assessment of the
performance of multimedia stream performance of multimedia stream
[G.107][P.564][G.1082][P.NAMS][P.NBAMS] and provides a method to [G.107][P.564][G.1082][P.1201][P.1202] and provides a method to
evaluate QoE estimation algorithms and objective model for video and evaluate QoE estimation algorithms and objective model for video and
audio. Hence this document recommends vendors and implementers to audio. Hence this document recommends vendors and implementers to
use these International Telecommunication Union (ITU)-specified use these International Telecommunication Union (ITU)-specified
methodologies to measure parameters when possible. methodologies to measure parameters when possible.
Editor's note: P.NAMS and P.NBAMS are replaced with P.1201 and
P.1202. However P.1201 is further splitted into P.1201.1 and
P.1201.2 and P.1202 is futher splitted into P.1202.1 and P.1202.2.
So shall we reference parent document P.1201 and P.1202 or
reference derived documents P.1201.1,P.1201.2, P.1202.1,P.1202.2?
3.1. Metric Block Structure 3.1. Metric Block Structure
The report block contents are dependent upon a series of flag bits The report block contents are dependent upon a series of flag bits
carried in the first part of the header. Not all parameters need to carried in the first part of the header. Not all parameters need to
be reported in each block. Flags indicate which are and which are be reported in each block. Flags indicate which are and which are
not reported. The fields corresponding to unreported parameters MUST not reported. The fields corresponding to unreported parameters MUST
be present, but are set to zero. The receiver MUST ignore any QoE be present, but are set to zero. The receiver MUST ignore any QoE
Metrics Block with a non-zero value in any field flagged as Metrics Block with a non-zero value in any field flagged as
unreported. The encoding of QoE metrics block payload consists of a unreported. The encoding of QoE metrics block payload consists of a
series of 32 bit units called segments that describe MOS Type, MoS series of 32 bit units called segments that describe MOS Type, MoS
algorithm and MoS value. algorithm and MoS value.
Editor's note: MOS values for narrowband, wideband, super wideband
and fullband codecs; these MOS values occupy the same range. For
video application,MoS values for SD resolution, HD resolution
video also occupy the same ranges and hence the QoE block needs to
indicate what the MOS reference is.
Editor's Note: If we add MoS reference concept, 32 bit segment is
not sufficient. Therefore it was suggested to expand 32 bit
segment into 48 bit segment to support MoS reference feature.
The QoE Metrics Block has the following format: The QoE Metrics Block has the following format:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BT=MMQ | I | Rsd | block length | | BT=QMB | I | Reserved | Block Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of source | | SSRC of source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 1 | | Segment 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 2 | | Segment 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
.................. ..................
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment n | | Segment n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
3.2. Definition of Fields in QoE Metrics Block 3.2. Definition of Fields in QoE Metrics Block
Block type (BT): 8 bits Block type (BT): 8 bits
The QoE Metrics Block is identified by the constant <SMQ>. The QoE Metrics Block is identified by the constant <QMB>.
Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits
This field is used to indicate whether the QoE metrics are This field is used to indicate whether the QoE metrics are
Interval or Cumulative metrics, that is, whether the reported Interval or Cumulative metrics, that is, whether the reported
values applies to the most recent measurement interval duration values applies to the most recent measurement interval duration
between successive metrics reports (I=10) (the Interval Duration) between successive metrics reports (I=10) (the Interval Duration)
or to the accumulation period characteristic of cumulative or to the accumulation period characteristic of cumulative
measurements (I=11) (the Cumulative Duration) or is a sampled measurements (I=11) (the Cumulative Duration) or is a sampled
instantaneous value (I=01) (Sampled Value). instantaneous value (I=01) (Sampled Value).
Rsd.: 6 bits Reserved.: 6 bits
This field is reserved for future definition. In the absence of This field is reserved for future definition. In the absence of
such a definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and such a definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and
MUST be ignored by the receiver. MUST be ignored by the receiver.
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 QoE Metrics Block, the block length is variable length. the QoE Metrics Block, the block length is variable length.
skipping to change at page 7, line 22 skipping to change at page 7, line 31
each media stream is identified by SSRC and sent in separate RTP each media stream is identified by SSRC and sent in separate RTP
stream. The left two bits of the section determine its type. If stream. The left two bits of the section determine its type. If
the leftmost bit of the segment is zero, then it is single stream the leftmost bit of the segment is zero, then it is single stream
segment. If the leftmost bit is one, then it is multi-channel segment. If the leftmost bit is one, then it is multi-channel
audio segment. Note that two segment types can not be present in audio segment. Note that two segment types can not be present in
the same metric block. the same metric block.
3.2.1. Single Stream per SSRC Segment 3.2.1. Single Stream per SSRC Segment
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| MT |CAlg | PT |Rsv. | MOS Value | |S| MT |CAlg | PT |Rsv. | MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Segment Type (S): 1 bit +----------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Editor's Note: If we add | Editor's Note: Shall we need to |
A zero identifies this as a single stream segment. Single stream | MoS reference concept, we | support MoS Scaling concept in the |
means there is only one media stream carried in one RTP stream. | should give a definition | future draft? One point on the list |
The single stream segment can be used to report the MoS value | of MoS reference which | is MoS Scaling concept is implicitly |
associated with this media stream identified by SSRC. If there | covers both audio | used within the industry when |
are multiple media streams and they want to use the single stream | application and video | quoting MOS scores for codecs and |
per SSRC segment to report the MOS value, they should be carried | application. | measurements. |
in the separate RTP streams with different SSRC. In this case, +----------------------------+--------------------------------------+
multiple QoE Metrics Blocks are required to report the MOS value
corresponding to each media stream using single stream segment.
Reserved (R): 1bit Segment Type (S): 1 bit
The bit in this field is reserved. It MUST be set to zero and This field is used to identify the segment type used in this
MUST be ignored by the receiver if the leftmost bit of Single report block. A zero identifies this as a single stream segment.
Stream Per SSRC Segment is set to 0. Single stream means there is only one media stream carried in one
RTP stream. The single stream segment can be used to report the
MoS value associated with this media stream identified by SSRC.
If there are multiple media streams and they want to use the
single stream per SSRC segment to report the MOS value, they
should be carried in the separate RTP streams with different SSRC.
In this case, multiple QoE Metrics Blocks are required to report
the MOS value corresponding to each media stream using single
stream segment.
MoS Type (MT): 4 bits MoS Type (MT): 4 bits
This field is used to indicate the MOS type to be reported. The This field is used to indicate the MOS type to be reported. The
MOS type is defined as follows: MOS type is defined as follows:
0000 MOS-LQ - Listening Quality MoS. 0000 MOS-LQ - Listening Quality MoS.
0001 MOS-CQ - Conversation Quality MoS. 0001 MOS-CQ - Conversation Quality MoS.
0010 MOS-A - Audio Quality MOS. 0010 MOS-A - Audio Quality MOS.
0010 MOS-V - Video Quality MOS. 0010 MOS-V - Video Quality MOS.
skipping to change at page 8, line 28 skipping to change at page 8, line 38
audio codec or narrowband audio codec, or both and does not take audio codec or narrowband audio codec, or both and does not take
into account any of bidirectional effects, such as delay and echo. into account any of bidirectional effects, such as delay and echo.
MOS-CQ uses narrowband codec and takes into account listening MOS-CQ uses narrowband codec and takes into account listening
quality in each direction, as well as the bidirectional effects. quality in each direction, as well as the bidirectional effects.
Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits
000 - ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice) 000 - ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)
001 - G.107 [G.107] (Voice) 001 - G.107 [G.107] (Voice)
010 - ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI] (Voice) 010 - ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI] (Voice)
011 - ITU-T P.NAMS [P.NAMS] (Multimedia) 011 - TTC JJ201.01 [TTC] (Voice)
100 - ITU-T P.NBAMS [P.NBAMS] (Multimedia) 100 - ITU-T P.1201 [P.1201] (Multimedia)
101~111 - Reserved for future extension. 101 - ITU-T P.1202 [P.1202] (Video)
110~111 - Reserved for future extension.
G.107 and P.564 and ETSI TS101 329-5 specify three Calculation G.107 and P.564 and ETSI TS101 329-5 specify three Calculation
algorithms or MoS algorithms that are used to estimate speech algorithms or MoS algorithms that are used to estimate speech
quality or conversation quality. P.NAMS and P.NBAMS specify two quality or conversation quality. P.NAMS and P.NBAMS specify two
MoS algorithms that are used to estimate multimedia quality MoS algorithms that are used to estimate multimedia quality
including video quality, audio quality and audio-video quality. including video quality, audio quality and audio-video quality.
If MoS type is MoS-LQ and MoS-CQ, the MoS value can be calculated If MoS type is MoS-LQ and MoS-CQ, the MoS value can be calculated
based on ITU-T G.107[G.107], ITU-T P.564 [P.564]or ETSI TS 101 based on ITU-T G.107[G.107], ITU-T P.564 [P.564]or ETSI TS 101
329-5 [ETSI], if the Mos type is MoS-V or MoS-AV, the Mos value 329-5 [ETSI], if the Mos type is MoS-V or MoS-AV, the Mos value
can be calculated based on ITU-T P.NAMS [P.NAMS]or ITU-T P.NBAMS can be calculated based on ITU-T P.NAMS [P.1201]or ITU-T P.NBAMS
[P.NBAMS]. If new MOS types are defined, they can be added by an
[P.1202]. If new MOS types are defined, they can be added by an
update to this document. If the receiver does not understand the update to this document. If the receiver does not understand the
MOS type defined in this document it should discard this report. MOS type defined in this document it should discard this report.
If MoS Type does not match the MoS algorithm in the report (e.g., If MoS Type does not match the MoS algorithm in the report (e.g.,
specify a voice MOS algorithm for a video quality MOS), the specify a voice MOS algorithm for a video quality MOS), the
receiver should also discard this report. receiver should also discard this report.
Payload Type (PT): 7 bits Payload Type (PT): 7 bits
QoE metrics reporting depends on the payload format in use. This QoE metrics reporting depends on the payload format in use. This
field identifies the format of the RTP payload. For RTP sessions field identifies the format of the RTP payload. For RTP sessions
where multiple payload formats can be negotiated or the payload where multiple payload formats can be negotiated or the payload
format changes during the mid-session), the value of this field format changes during the mid-session), the value of this field
will be used to indicate what payload format was in use for the will be used to indicate what payload format was in use for the
reporting interval. reporting interval.
Rsd.:3 bits Rsd.:3 bits
skipping to change at page 9, line 30 skipping to change at page 9, line 44
0.0 to 50.0, corresponding to MoS x 10 as for MoS. If the 0.0 to 50.0, corresponding to MoS x 10 as for MoS. If the
measured value is over ranged, the value 0xFFFE SHOULD be reported measured value is over ranged, the value 0xFFFE SHOULD be reported
to indicate an over-range measurement. If the measurement is to indicate an over-range measurement. If the measurement is
unavailable, the value 0xFFFF SHOULD be reported. Values other unavailable, the value 0xFFFF SHOULD be reported. Values other
than 0xFFFE,0xFFFF and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be than 0xFFFE,0xFFFF and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be
sent and MUST be ignored by the receiving system. sent and MUST be ignored by the receiving system.
3.2.2. Multi-Channel audio per SSRC Segment 3.2.2. Multi-Channel audio per SSRC Segment
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1| MT |CAlg | PT |CHID | MOS Value | |S| MT |CAlg | PT |CHID | MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Segement Type (S): 1 bit Segement Type (S): 1 bit
A one identifies this as either a multi-channel segment or multi- This field is used to identify the segment type used in this
layer segment. report block. A one identifies this as a multi-channel audio
segment.
Media Type (M): 1bit Media Type (M): 1bit
A zero identifies this as a multi-channel per SSRC segment. A zero identifies this as a multi-channel per SSRC segment.
MoS Type (MT): 4 bits MoS Type (MT): 4 bits
As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document. If the value of As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document. If the value of
this field is not corresponding to MoS-CQ or MoS-LQ, the receiver this field is not corresponding to MoS-CQ or MoS-LQ, the receiver
using multi-channel segment should discard this invalid segment using multi-channel segment should discard this invalid segment
with the wrong MoS Type. with the wrong MoS Type.
Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits
000 - ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice) 000 - ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)
001 - G.107 [G.107] (Voice) 001 - G.107 [G.107] (Voice)
010 - ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E, [ ETSI] (Voice) 010 - ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E, [ ETSI] (Voice)
011~100 - Reserved. 011 - TTC JJ201.01 [TTC] (Voice)
101~111 - Reserved for future extension. 100~111 - Reserved for future extension.
Payload Type (PT): 7 bits Payload Type (PT): 7 bits
As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document. As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document.
Channel Identifier (CHID): 3 bits Channel Identifier (CHID): 3 bits
If multiple channels of audio are carried in one RTP stream, each If multiple channels of audio are carried in one RTP stream, each
channel of audio will be viewed as a independent channel(e.g., channel of audio will be viewed as a independent channel(e.g.,
left channel audio, right channel audio). This field is used to left channel audio, right channel audio). This field is used to
skipping to change at page 11, line 5 skipping to change at page 11, line 16
As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document. As defined in Section 3.2.1 of this document.
4. SDP Signaling 4. SDP Signaling
One new parameter is defined for the report block defined in this One new parameter is defined for the report block defined in this
document to be used with Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] document to be used with Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566]
using the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]. It has the using the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]. It has the
following syntax within the "rtcp-xr" attribute [RFC3611]: following syntax within the "rtcp-xr" attribute [RFC3611]:
rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=rtcp-xr:"
[xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF
xr-format = qoe-metrics xr-format = qoe-metrics
qoe-metrics = "multimedia-quality-metrics" qoe-metrics = "QoE metrics"
Refer to Section 5.1 of RFC 3611 [RFC3611] for a detailed description Refer to Section 5.1 of RFC 3611 [RFC3611] for a detailed description
and the full syntax of the "rtcp-xr" attribute. and the full syntax of the "rtcp-xr" attribute.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
New block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. For New block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. For
general guidelines on IANA considerations for RTCP XR, refer to general guidelines on IANA considerations for RTCP XR, refer to
[RFC3611]. [RFC3611].
skipping to change at page 12, line 21 skipping to change at page 12, line 33
described in Section 4.1 of [RFC5226]. described in Section 4.1 of [RFC5226].
o Entries in the registry are integers. The valid range is 0 to 7 o Entries in the registry are integers. The valid range is 0 to 7
corresponding to the 3-bit field "CAlg" in the block. Values are corresponding to the 3-bit field "CAlg" in the block. Values are
to be recorded in decimal. to be recorded in decimal.
o Initial assignments are as follows: o Initial assignments are as follows:
1. ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice) 1. ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)
2. G.107 [G.107] (Voice) 2. G.107 [G.107] (Voice)
3. ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI] (Voice) 3. ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI] (Voice)
4. ITU-T P.NAMS [P.NAMS] (Multimedia) 4. TTC JJ201.01 [TTC] (Voice)
5. ITU-T P.NBAMS [P.NBAMS] (Multimedia) 5. ITU-T P.1201 [P.1201] (Multimedia)
6. ITU-T P.1202 [P.1202] (Video)
5.5. New registry of calculation algorithms for multi-channel audio 5.5. New registry of calculation algorithms for multi-channel audio
segment segment
This document creates a new registry for multi-channel audio per SSRC This document creates a new registry for multi-channel audio per SSRC
segment defined in the section 3.2.2 to be called "RTCP XR QoE metric segment defined in the section 3.2.2 to be called "RTCP XR QoE metric
block - multi-channel application Calculation Algorithm" as a sub- block - multi-channel application Calculation Algorithm" as a sub-
registry of the "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR) registry of the "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)
Block Type Registry" if multi-channel voice data are carried in the Block Type Registry" if multi-channel voice data are carried in the
same RTP stream. Policies for this new registry are as follows: same RTP stream. Policies for this new registry are as follows:
skipping to change at page 13, line 4 skipping to change at page 13, line 15
o The review process for the registry is "Specification Required" as o The review process for the registry is "Specification Required" as
described in Section 4.1 of [RFC5226]. described in Section 4.1 of [RFC5226].
o Entries in the registry are integers. The valid range is 0 to 7 o Entries in the registry are integers. The valid range is 0 to 7
corresponding to the 3-bit field "CAlg" in the block. Values are corresponding to the 3-bit field "CAlg" in the block. Values are
to be recorded in decimal. to be recorded in decimal.
o Initial assignments are as follows: o Initial assignments are as follows:
1. ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice) 1. ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)
2. G.107 [G.107] (Voice) 2. G.107 [G.107] (Voice)
3. ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ETSI] (Voice) 3. ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ETSI] (Voice)
4. TTC JJ201.01 [TTC] (Voice)
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
The new RTCP XR report blocks proposed in this document introduces no The new RTCP XR report blocks proposed in this document introduces no
new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611]. new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611].
7. Authors 7. Authors
This draft merges ideas from two drafts addressing the QoE metric This draft merges ideas from two drafts addressing the QoE metric
Reporting issue. The authors of these drafts are listed below (in Reporting issue. The authors of these drafts are listed below (in
skipping to change at page 13, line 25 skipping to change at page 13, line 37
Alan Clark < alan.d.clark@telchemy.com > Alan Clark < alan.d.clark@telchemy.com >
Geoff Hunt < r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com > Geoff Hunt < r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com >
Martin Kastner < martin.kastner@telchemy.com > Martin Kastner < martin.kastner@telchemy.com >
Kai Lee < leekai@ctbri.com.cn > Kai Lee < leekai@ctbri.com.cn >
Roland Schott < roland.schott@telekom.de > Roland Schott < roland.schott@telekom.de >
Qin Wu < sunseawq@huawei.com > Qin Wu < sunseawq@huawei.com >
Glen Zorn < gwz@net-zen.net > Glen Zorn < gwz@net-zen.net >
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Alan Clark, Bill Ver Steeg, David R The authors would like to thank Bill Ver Steeg, David R Oran, Ali
Oran, Ali Begen,Colin Perkins, Roni Even,Youqing Yang, Wenxiao Yu and Begen,Colin Perkins, Roni Even,Youqing Yang, Wenxiao Yu and Yinliang
Yinliang Hu for their valuable comments and suggestions on this Hu for their valuable comments and suggestions on this document.
document.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[ATSC] U.S. Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC), "ATSC [ATSC] U.S. Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC), "ATSC
Standard: Digital Audio Compression (AC-3), Revision B", Standard: Digital Audio Compression (AC-3), Revision B",
ATSC Doc A/52B, June 2005. ATSC Doc A/52B, June 2005.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
skipping to change at page 14, line 29 skipping to change at page 14, line 42
[G.107] ITU-T, "The E Model, a computational model for use in [G.107] ITU-T, "The E Model, a computational model for use in
transmission planning", ITU-T Recommendation G.107, transmission planning", ITU-T Recommendation G.107,
April 2009. April 2009.
[G.1082] ITU-T, "Measurement-based methods for improving the [G.1082] ITU-T, "Measurement-based methods for improving the
robustness of IPTV performance", ITU-T robustness of IPTV performance", ITU-T
Recommendation G.1082, April 2009. Recommendation G.1082, April 2009.
[MONARCH] Wu, Q., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP", [MONARCH] Wu, Q., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP",
ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00, April 2011. ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-22, September 2012.
[P.1201] ITU-T, "Parametric non-intrusive assessment of audiovisual
media streaming quality", ITU-T Recommendation P.1201,
October 2012.
[P.1202] ITU-T, "non-intrusive bit-stream model for assessment of
performance of multimedia streaming", ITU-T
Recommendation P.1202, October 2012.
[P.564] ITU-T, "Conformance testing for narrowband Voice over IP [P.564] ITU-T, "Conformance testing for narrowband Voice over IP
transmission quality assessment models", ITU-T transmission quality assessment models", ITU-T
Recommendation P.564, July 2006. Recommendation P.564, July 2006.
[P.NAMS] ITU-T, "Non-intrusive parametric model for the Assessment
of performance of Multimedia Streaming", ITU-T
Recommendation P.NAMS, November 2009.
[P.NBAMS] ITU-T, "non-intrusive bit-stream model for assessment of
performance of multimedia streaming", ITU-T
Recommendation P.NBAMS, November 2009.
[RFC4184] Link, B., Hager, T., and J. Flaks, "RTP Payload Format for [RFC4184] Link, B., Hager, T., and J. Flaks, "RTP Payload Format for
AC-3 Audio", RFC 4184, October 2005. AC-3 Audio", RFC 4184, October 2005.
[RFC4598] Link, B., "Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) Payload [RFC4598] Link, B., "Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) Payload
Format for Enhanced AC-3 (E-AC-3) Audio", RFC 4598, Format for Enhanced AC-3 (E-AC-3) Audio", RFC 4598,
July 2006. July 2006.
[RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric [RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric
Development", RFC 6390, October 2011. Development", RFC 6390, October 2011.
[TTC] TTC 201.01 (Japan), "A method for speech quality
assessment for Voice over IP".
Appendix A. Change Log Appendix A. Change Log
A.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 A.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03
The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Add one new reference to support TTC JJ201.01.
o Update two references P.NAMS and P.NBAMS.
o Other Editorial changes based on comments applied to PDV and Delay
drafts.
A.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Remove leftmost second bit since it is ueeless. o Remove leftmost second bit since it is ueeless.
o Change 13bits MoS value field into 14 bits to increase MoS o Change 13bits MoS value field into 14 bits to increase MoS
precision. precision.
o Fix some typo and make some editorial changes. o Fix some typo and make some editorial changes.
A.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 A.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Remove layered support from the QoE metric draft. o Remove layered support from the QoE metric draft.
o Allocate 7 bits in the block header for payload type to indicate o Allocate 7 bits in the block header for payload type to indicate
what type of payload format is in use and add associated what type of payload format is in use and add associated
definition of payload type. definition of payload type.
o Clarify using Payload Type to determine the appropriate channel o Clarify using Payload Type to determine the appropriate channel
mapping in the definition of Channel Identifier. mapping in the definition of Channel Identifier.
A.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00 A.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Allocate one more bit in the single stream per SSC segment to get o Allocate one more bit in the single stream per SSC segment to get
alignment with the other two segment type. alignment with the other two segment type.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Geoff Hunt
Unaffiliated
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
Qin Wu Qin Wu
Huawei Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
China China
Email: sunseawq@huawei.com Email: sunseawq@huawei.com
Roland Schott Roland Schott
Deutsche Telekom Laboratories Deutsche Telekom Laboratories
 End of changes. 39 change blocks. 
81 lines changed or deleted 113 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/