draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-13.txt   draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-14.txt 
Network Working Group A. Clark Network Working Group A. Clark
Internet-Draft Telchemy Internet-Draft Telchemy
Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu
Expires: July 11, 2014 Huawei Expires: August 17, 2014 Huawei
R. Schott R. Schott
Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom
G. Zorn G. Zorn
Network Zen Network Zen
January 9, 2014 February 13, 2014
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Blocks for MOS Metric RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Blocks for MOS Metric
Reporting Reporting
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-13 draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-14
Abstract Abstract
This document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report This document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report
(XR) Block including two new segment types and associated SDP (XR) Block including two new segment types and associated SDP
parameters that allow the reporting of MOS Metrics for use in a range parameters that allow the reporting of mean opinion score (MOS)
of RTP applications. 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/.
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
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 July 11, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 17, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 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 19 skipping to change at page 2, line 19
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. MOS Metrics Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. MOS Metrics Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.3. Performance Metrics Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. MOS Metrics Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. MoS Metrics Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Metric Block Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. Metric Block Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Definition of Fields in MOS Metrics Block . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Definition of Fields in MoS Metrics Block . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.1. Single Channel audio/video per SSRC Segment . . . . . 8 3.2.1. Single Channel audio/video per SSRC Segment . . . . . 8
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2. Offer/Answer Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.2. Offer/Answer Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.1. New RTCP XR Block Type value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.1. New RTCP XR Block Type value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2. New RTCP XR SDP Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2. New RTCP XR SDP Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.3. The SDP calgextmap Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.3. The SDP calgextmap Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.4. New registry of calculation algorithms . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.4. New registry of calculation algorithms . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template . . . . . 20 Appendix A. Metrics represented using RFC6390 Template . . . . . 19
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 B.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B.5. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.5. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B.6. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.6. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B.7. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 B.7. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B.8. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 B.8. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B.9. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 B.9. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
C.9. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 B.10. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
B.10. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 B.11. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
1.1. MOS Metrics Report Block 1.1. MOS 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 media quality using one of The new block type provides information on media quality using one of
several standard metrics (i.e. Mean Opinion Score(MOS)). several standard metrics (i.e. Mean Opinion Score(MOS)).
The metrics belong to the class of application level metrics defined The metrics belong to the class of application level metrics defined
in [RFC6792]. in [RFC6792].
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 for Report (XR). This document defines a new Extended Report block for
use with [RFC3550] and [RFC3611]. use with [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].
skipping to change at page 4, line 49 skipping to change at page 4, line 49
The factors that affect real-time audio/video application quality can The factors that affect real-time audio/video application quality can
be split into two categories. The first category consists of be split into two categories. The first category consists of
transport-specific factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter transport-specific factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter
(which also translates into losses in the playback buffer). The (which also translates into losses in the playback buffer). The
factors in the second category consists of content and codec related factors in the second category consists of content and codec related
factors such as codec type and loss recovery technique, coding bit factors such as codec type and loss recovery technique, coding bit
rate, packetization scheme, and content characteristics rate, packetization scheme, and content characteristics
Transport-specific factors may be insufficient to infer real time Transport-specific factors may be insufficient to infer real time
media quality as codec related parameters and the interaction media quality as codec related parameters and the interaction between
between transport problems and application layer protocols can transport problems and application layer protocols can have a
have a substantial effect on observed media quality. Media quality substantial effect on observed media quality. Media quality may be
may be measured using algorithm that directly compare input and measured using algorithm that directly compare input and output media
output media streams, or may be estimated using algorithms that streams, or may be estimated using algorithms that model the
model the interaction between media quality, protocol and encoded interaction between media quality, protocol and encoded content.
content. Media quality is commonly expressed in terms of Mean Media quality is commonly expressed in terms of Mean Opinion Scores
Opinion Scores (MOS) however is also represented by a range of (MOS) however is also represented by a range of indexes and other
indexes and other scores. scores.
The measurement of media quality has a number of applications: The measurement of media quality has a number of applications:
o Detecting problems with media delivery or encoding that is o Detecting problems with media delivery or encoding that is
impacting user perceived quality. impacting user perceived quality.
o Tuning the content encoder algorithm to satisfy real time data o Tuning the content encoder algorithm to satisfy real time data
quality requirements. quality requirements.
o Determining which system techniques to use in a given situation o Determining which system techniques to use in a given situation
and when to switch from one technique to another as system and when to switch from one technique to another as system
parameters change (for example as discussed in [P.1082]). parameters change (for example as discussed in [P.1082]).
o Pre-qualifying a network to assess its ability to deliver an o Pre-qualifying a network to assess its ability to deliver an
acceptable end-user perceived quality level. acceptable end-user perceived quality level.
skipping to change at page 5, line 31 skipping to change at page 5, line 31
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
2.1. Standards Language 2.1. Standards Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
The terminology used is The terminology used is
Numeric formats S X:Y Numeric formats X:Y
where S indicates a two's complement signed representation, X where X the number of bits prior to the decimal place and Y the
the number of bits prior to the decimal place and Y the number number of bits after the decimal place.
of bits after the decimal place.
Hence 8:8 represents an unsigned number in the range 0.0 to Hence 8:8 represents an unsigned number in the range 0.0 to
255.996 with a granularity of 0.0039. S7:8 would represent the 255.996 with a granularity of 0.0039. 0:16 represents a proper
range -127.996 to +127.996. 0:16 represents a proper binary binary fraction with range
fraction with range
0.0 to 1 - 1/65536 = 0.9999847 0.0 to 1 - 1/65536 = 0.9999847
though note that use of flag values at the top of the numeric though note that use of flag values at the top of the numeric
range slightly reduces this upper limit. For example, if the range slightly reduces this upper limit. For example, if the
16- bit values 0xfffe and 0xffff are used as flags for "over- 16- bit values 0xfffe and 0xffff are used as flags for "over-
range" and "unavailable" conditions, a 0:16 quantity has range range" and "unavailable" conditions, a 0:16 quantity has range
0.0 to 1 - 3/65536 = 0.9999542 0.0 to 1 - 3/65536 = 0.9999542
3. MOS Metrics Block 3. MoS Metrics Block
Multimedia application MOS Metric is commonly expressed as a MOS Multimedia application MOS Metric is commonly expressed as a MOS
("Mean Opinion Score"), MOS is usually on a scale from 1 to 5, in ("Mean Opinion Score"), MOS is usually on a scale from 1 to 5, in
which 5 represents excellent and 1 represents unacceptable however which 5 represents excellent and 1 represents unacceptable however
can use other ranges (for example 1 to 11). The term "MOS score" can use other ranges (for example 1 to 11). The term "MOS score"
originates from subjective testing, and is used to refer to the originates from subjective testing, and is used to refer to the Mean
Mean of a number of individual Opinion Scores. There is therefore of a number of individual Opinion Scores. There is therefore a well
a well understood relationship between MOS and user experience, understood relationship between MOS and user experience, hence the
hence the industry commonly uses MOS as the scale for objective industry commonly uses MOS as the scale for objective test results.
test results. Subjective tests can be used for measuring live Subjective tests can be used for measuring live network traffic
network traffic however the use of objective or algorithmic however the use of objective or algorithmic measurement techniques
measurement techniques allows much large scale measurements to allows much larger scale measurements to be made. Within the scope
be made. Within the scope of this document, MOS scores are of this document, MOS scores are obtained using objective or
obtained using objective or estimation algorithms. estimation algorithms. ITU-T or ITU-R recommendations (e.g.,
ITU-T or ITU-R recommendations (e.g., [BS.1387-1], [G.107], [BS.1387-1][G.107][G.107.1][P.862][P.862.1][P.862.2][P.863][P.564][G.
[G.107.1], [P.862], [P.862.1], [P.862.2], [P.863], [P.564], 1082][P.1201.1][P.1201.2][P.1202.1][P.1202.2]) define methodologies
[P.1201.1], [P.1201.2], [P.1202.1], [P.1202.2]) define for assessment of the performance of audio and video streams. Other
methodologies for assessment of the performance of audio and international and national standards organizations such as EBU, ETSI,
video streams. Other international and national standards IEC and IEEE also define QoE algorithms and methodologies, and the
organizations such as EBU, ETSI, IEC and IEEE also define intent of this document is not to restrict its use to ITU
QoE algorithms and methodologies, and the intent of this document recommendations but to suggest that ITU recommendations be used where
is not to restrict its use to ITU recommendations but to suggest they are defined.
that ITU recommendations be used where they are defined.
This block reports media quality in the form of a 1-5 MOS range This block reports media quality in the form of a 1-5 MOS range
however does not report QoE scores that include parameters however does not report QoE scores that include parameters outside
outside the scope of the RTP stream, for example signaling the scope of the RTP stream, for example signaling performance, MTTR
performance, MTTR or other factors that may affect the overall or other factors that may affect the overall user experience.
user experience.
The MOS Metric reported in this block gives a numerical indication The MOS Metric reported in this block gives a numerical indication of
of the perceived quality of the received media stream, which is the perceived quality of the received media stream, which is
typically measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream. typically measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream. Instances
Instances of this Metrics Block refer by Synchronization source of this Metrics Block refer by Synchronization source (SSRC) to the
(SSRC) to the separate auxiliary Measurement Information block separate auxiliary Measurement Information block [RFC6776] which
[RFC6776] which describes measurement periods in use (see RFC6776 describes measurement periods in use (see RFC6776 section 4.2).
section 4.2).
This Metrics Block relies on the measurement period in the This Metrics Block relies on the measurement period in the
Measurement Information block indicating the span of the report. Measurement Information block indicating the span of the report.
Senders MUST send this block in the same compound RTCP packet as the Senders MUST send this block in the same compound RTCP packet as the
measurement information block. Receivers MUST verify that the measurement information block. Receivers MUST verify that the
measurement period is received in the same compound RTCP packet as measurement period is received in the same compound RTCP packet as
this Metrics Block. If not, this Metrics Block MUST be discarded. this Metrics Block. If not, this Metrics Block MUST be discarded.
3.1. Metric Block Structure 3.1. Metric Block Structure
skipping to change at page 7, line 21 skipping to change at page 7, line 21
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 1 | | Segment 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 2 | | Segment 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
.................. ..................
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment n | | Segment n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
3.2. Definition of Fields in MOS Metrics Block 3.2. Definition of Fields in MoS Metrics Block
Block type (BT): 8 bits Block type (BT): 8 bits
The MOS Metrics Block is identified by the constant <MMB>. The MOS Metrics Block is identified by the constant <MMB>.
Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits
This field is used to indicate whether the MOS Metrics are This field is used to indicate whether the MOS Metrics are
Sampled, Interval or Cumulative [RFC6792]: Sampled, Interval or Cumulative [RFC6792]:
I=10: Interval Duration - the reported value applies to the I=10: Interval Duration - the reported value applies to the
most recent measurement interval duration between successive most recent measurement interval duration between successive
metrics reports. metrics reports.
I=11: Cumulative Duration - the reported value applies to the I=11: Cumulative Duration - the reported value applies to the
accumulation period characteristic of cumulative measurements. accumulation period characteristic of cumulative measurements.
I=01: Sampled Value - the reported value is a sampled I=01: Sampled Value - the reported value is a sampled
instantaneous value. instantaneous value.
I=00: Reserved I=00: Reserved
In this document, MOS Metrics MAY be reported for intervals or In this document, MOS Metrics MAY be reported for intervals or for
for the duration of the media stream (cumulative) however it the duration of the media stream (cumulative). The value I=01,
is not recommended that sampled values are used. indicating a sampled value, MUST NOT be sent, and MUST be
discarded when received.
Reserved: 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
ignored by the receiver (See RFC6709 section 4.2). ignored by the receiver (See RFC6709 section 4.2).
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
skipping to change at page 8, line 49 skipping to change at page 9, line 9
be carried in the separate RTP streams with each identified by be carried in the separate RTP streams with each identified by
different SSRC. In this case, multiple MOS Metrics Blocks are different SSRC. In this case, multiple MOS Metrics Blocks are
required to report the MOS value corresponding to each media required to report the MOS value corresponding to each media
stream using single channel Audio/Video per SSRC segment in the stream using single channel Audio/Video per SSRC segment in the
same RTCP XR packet. same RTCP XR packet.
Calculation Algorithm ID (CAID) : 8 bits Calculation Algorithm ID (CAID) : 8 bits
The 8-bit CAID is the session specific reference to the The 8-bit CAID is the session specific reference to the
calculation algorithm and associated qualifiers indicated in SDP calculation algorithm and associated qualifiers indicated in SDP
(see Section 4.1) and used to compute QoE scores for this segment (see Section 4.1) and used to compute QoE scores for this segment.
Payload Type (PT): 7 bits Payload Type (PT): 7 bits
MOS Metrics reporting depends on the payload format in use. This MOS Metrics reporting depends on the payload format in use. This
field identifies the RTP payload type in use during the reporting field identifies the RTP payload type in use during the reporting
interval. The binding between RTP payload types and RTP payload interval. The binding between RTP payload types and RTP payload
formats is configured via a signalling protocol, for example an formats is configured via a signalling protocol, for example an
SDP offer/answer exchange. If the RTP payload type used is SDP offer/answer exchange. If the RTP payload type used is
changed during an RTP session, separate reports SHOULD be sent for changed during an RTP session, separate reports SHOULD be sent for
each RTP payload type, with corresponding measurement information each RTP payload type, with corresponding measurement information
skipping to change at page 9, line 28 skipping to change at page 9, line 34
use distinct audio or video codecs and the indication of the use distinct audio or video codecs and the indication of the
encoding of these is within the MPEG Transport stream and does not encoding of these is within the MPEG Transport stream and does not
use RTP payloads. use RTP payloads.
MOS Value: 16 bits MOS Value: 16 bits
The estimated Mean Opinion Score for multimedia application The estimated Mean Opinion Score for multimedia application
performance is defined as including the effects of delay,loss, performance is defined as including the effects of delay,loss,
discard, jitter and other effects that would affect media quality. discard, jitter and other effects that would affect media quality.
A 1-5 MOS score is multiplied by 10 and then represented in the A 1-5 MOS score is multiplied by 10 and then represented in the
8:8 format. If the measured value is over range, the value 7:9 format. A value of 0xFFFE is a flag indicating that the
0xFFFE MUST be reported. If the measurement is unavailable, the measured value is out of range. A value of 0xFFFF is a flag
value 0xFFFF MUST be reported. Values other than 0xFFFE, 0xFFFF indicating that the measurement is unavailable. Values other than
and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be sent and MUST be 0xFFFE, 0xFFFF and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be sent
ignored by the receiving system. 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|S| CAID | PT |CHID | MOS Value | |S| CAID | PT |CHID | MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Segment Type (S): 1 bit Segment Type (S): 1 bit
This field is used to identify the segment type used in this This field is used to identify the segment type used in this
report block. A one identifies this as a multi-channel audio report block. A one identifies this as a multi-channel audio
segment. segment.
Calculation Algorithm ID (CAID) : 8 bits Calculation Algorithm ID (CAID) : 8 bits
The 8-bit CAID is the session specific reference to the The 8-bit CAID is the session specific reference to the
calculation algorithm and associated qualifiers indicated in SDP calculation algorithm and associated qualifiers indicated in SDP
(see Section 4.1) and used to compute QoE scores for this segment (see Section 4.1) and used to compute QoE scores for this segment.
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
identify each channel carried in the same media stream. The identify each channel carried in the same media stream. The
default Channel mapping follows static ordering rule described in default Channel mapping follows static ordering rule described in
the section 4.1 of [RFC3551]. However there are some payload the section 4.1 of [RFC3551]. However there are some payload
formats that use different channel mappings, e.g., AC-3 audio over formats that use different channel mappings, e.g., AC-3 audio over
skipping to change at page 10, line 26 skipping to change at page 10, line 36
channel transform mechanism. In order that the appropriate channel transform mechanism. In order that the appropriate
channel mapping can be determined, MOS metrics reports need to be channel mapping can be determined, MOS metrics reports need to be
tied to an RTP payload format, i.e., including the payload type of tied to an RTP payload format, i.e., including the payload type of
the reported media according to [RFC6792] and using Payload Type the reported media according to [RFC6792] and using Payload Type
to determine the appropriate channel mapping. to determine the appropriate channel mapping.
MOS Value: 13 bits MOS Value: 13 bits
The estimated Mean Opinion Score for multimedia application The estimated Mean Opinion Score for multimedia application
performance includes the effects of delay,loss, discard, jitter performance includes the effects of delay,loss, discard, jitter
and other effects that would affect multimedia quality. and other effects that would affect multimedia quality. The
The estimated MOS value is multiplied by 10 and expressed in estimated MOS value is multiplied by 10 and expressed in 7:6
6:7 format. If the measured value is over range, the value format. A value of 0x1FFE is a flag indicating that the measured
0x1FFE MUST be reported to indicate an over-range measurement. value is out of range. A value of 0x1FFF is a flag indicating
If the measurement is unavailable, the value 0x1FFF MUST be that the measurement is unavailable. Values other than 0x1FFE,
reported. Values other than 0x1FFE, 0x1FFF and the valid range 0x1FFF and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be sent and MUST
defined above MUST NOT be sent and MUST be ignored by the be ignored by the receiving system.
receiving system.
4. SDP Signaling 4. SDP Signaling
[RFC3611] defines the use of SDP (Session Description Protocol) [RFC3611]defines the use of SDP (Session Description Protocol)
[RFC4566] for signaling the use of XR blocks. However XR blocks MAY [RFC4566] for signaling the use of XR blocks. However XR blocks MAY
be used without prior signaling (see section 5 of RFC3611). be used without prior signaling (see section 5 of RFC3611).
4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension 4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension
This section augments the SDP [RFC4566] attribute "rtcp-xr" defined This section augments the SDP [RFC4566] attribute "rtcp-xr" defined
in [RFC3611] by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to in [RFC3611] by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to
signal the use of the report block defined in this document. Within signal the use of the report block defined in this document. Within
the "xr-format", the syntax element "calgextmap" is an attribute as the "xr-format", the syntax element "calgextmap" is an attribute as
defined in [RFC4566] and used to signal the mapping of the local defined in [RFC4566] and used to signal the mapping of the local
identifier (CAID) in the segment extension defined in section 3.2 to identifier (CAID) in the segment extension defined in section 3.2 to
the calculation algorithm. Specific extensionattributes are defined the calculation algorithm. Specific extensionattributes are defined
by the specification that defines a specific extension name; there by the specification that defines a specific extension name; there
might be several. might be several.
xr-format =/ xr-mos-block xr-format =/ xr-mos-block
xr-mos-block = "mos-metrics" ["=" extmap *("," calgextmap)] xr-mos-block = "mos-metrics" ["=" calgextmap *("," calgextmap)]
calgextmap = mapentry "=" extensionname [SP extentionattributes] calgextmap = mapentry "=" extensionname [SP extentionattributes]
direction = "sendonly" / "recvonly" / "sendrecv" / "inactive" direction = "sendonly" / "recvonly" / "sendrecv" / "inactive"
mapentry = "calg:" 1*3 DIGIT ["/" direction] mapentry = "calg:" 1*3 DIGIT ["/" direction]
; Values in the range 1-255 are valid ; Values in the range 1-255 are valid
; if needed, 0 can be used to indicate that ; if needed, 0 can be used to indicate that
; an algorithm is rejected ; an algorithm is rejected
extensionname = "P564";ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] extensionname = "P564";ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564]
/ "G107";ITU-T G.107 [G.107] / "G107";ITU-T G.107 [G.107]
/ "G107_1";ITU-T G.107.1 [G.107.1] / "G107_1";ITU-T G.107.1 [G.107.1]
/ "TS101_329";ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI] / "TS101_329";ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [ ETSI]
skipping to change at page 11, line 39 skipping to change at page 11, line 51
/ "h";higher resolution / "h";higher resolution
/ non-ws-string) / non-ws-string)
attributes-ext = non-ws-string attributes-ext = non-ws-string
SP = <Define in RFC5234> SP = <Define in RFC5234>
non-ws-string = 1*(%x21-FF) non-ws-string = 1*(%x21-FF)
Each local identifier (CAID)of calculation algorithm used in the Each local identifier (CAID)of calculation algorithm used in the
segment defined in the section 3.2 is mapped to a string using an segment defined in the section 3.2 is mapped to a string using an
attribute of the form: attribute of the form:
a=calgextmap:<value> ["/"<direction>] <name> [<extensionattributes>] a=calg:<value> ["/"<direction>] <name> [<extensionattributes>]
where <name> is a calculation algorithm name, as above, <value> is where <name> is a calculation algorithm name, as above, <value> is
the local identifier (CAID)of the calculation algorithm associated the local identifier (CAID)of the calculation algorithm associated
with the segment defined in this document and is an integer in the with the segment defined in this document and is an integer in the
valid range inclusive. valid range inclusive.
Example: Example:
a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:1=G107,calg:2=P1202_1 a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:1=G107,calg:2=P1202_1
A usable mapping MUST use IDs in the valid range, and each ID in this A usable mapping MUST use IDs in the valid range, and each ID in this
range MUST be unique and used only once for each stream or each range MUST be unique and used only once for each stream or each
channel in the stream. channel in the stream.
The mapping MUST be provided per media stream (in the media-level The mapping MUST be provided per media stream (in the media-level
section(s) of SDP, i.e., after an "m=" line). section(s) of SDP, i.e., after an "m=" line).
The syntax element "mosref" is referred to the media resolution The syntax element "mosref" is referred to the media resolution
relative reference and has three valules 'l','m','h'.(e.g., relative reference and has three valules 'l','m','h'.(e.g.,
Narrowband (3.4kHz) Speech and StandardDefinition (SD) or lower Narrowband (3.4kHz) Speech and Standard Definition (SD) or lower
Resolution Video have 'l' resolution, Super Wideband (>14kHz) Speech Resolution Video have 'l' resolution, Super Wideband (>14kHz) Speech
or higher and High Definition (HD) or higher Resolution Video have or higher and High Definition (HD) or higher Resolution Video have
'h' Resolution, Wideband speech(7khz) and Video with resolution 'h' Resolution, Wideband speech(7khz) and Video with resolution
between SD and HD has 'm' resolution). MOS scores reported in the between SD and HD has 'm' resolution). MOS scores reported in the
mos metrics block might vary with the MOS reference; For example, MOS mos metrics block might vary with the MOS reference; For example, MOS
values for narrowband, wideband, super wideband codecs occupy the values for narrowband, wideband, super wideband codecs occupy the
same range but SHOULD be reported in different value. For video same range but SHOULD be reported in different value. For video
application, MOS scores for SD resolution, HD resolution video also application, MOS scores for SD resolution, HD resolution video also
occupy the same ranges and SHOULD be reported in different value. occupy the same ranges and SHOULD be reported in different value.
4.2. Offer/Answer Usage 4.2. Offer/Answer Usage
When SDP is used in offer-answer context, the SDP Offer/Answer When SDP is used in offer-answer context, the SDP Offer/Answer usage
usage defined in [RFC3611] applies. In the offer answer defined in [RFC3611] applies. In the offer answer context, the
context, the signaling described above might be used in signaling described above might be used in three ways:
three ways:
o asymmetric behavior (segment extensions sent in only one o asymmetric behavior (segment extensions sent in only one
direction), direction),
o the offer of mutually exclusive alternatives, or o the offer of mutually exclusive alternatives, or
o the offer of more segments than can be sent in a single session. o the offer of more segments than can be sent in a single session.
A direction attribute MAY be included in a calgextmap; without it, A direction attribute MAY be included in a calgextmap; without it,
the direction implicitly inherits, of course, from the RTCP stream the direction implicitly inherits, of course, from the RTCP stream
direction. direction.
Segment extensions, with their directions, MAY be signaled for an Segment extensions, with their directions, MAY be signaled for an
"inactive" stream. It is an error to use an extension direction "inactive" stream. An extension direction SHOULD be compatible with
incompatible with the stream direction (e.g., a "sendonly" attribute the stream direction. If a segment extension in the SDP offer is
for a "recvonly" stream). marked as "sendonly" and the answerer desires to receive it, the
extension MUST be marked as "recvonly" in the SDP answer. An
answerer that has no desire to receive the extension or does not
understand the extension SHOULD remove it from the SDP answer.
If an segment extension is offered as "sendrecv", explicitly or If a segment extension is marked as "recvonly" in the SDP offer and
the answerer desires to send it, the extension MUST be marked as
"sendonly" in the SDP answer. An answerer that has no desire to, or
is unable to, send the extension SHOULD remove it from the SDP
answer.
If a segment extension is offered as "sendrecv", explicitly or
implicitly, and asymmetric behavior is desired, the SDP MAY be implicitly, and asymmetric behavior is desired, the SDP MAY be
modified to modify or add direction qualifiers for that segment modified to modify or add direction qualifiers for that segment
extension. extension.
A mosref attribute and mos type attribute MAY be included in an A mosref attribute and mos type attribute MAY be included in an
calgextmap; without it, the mosref and most type attribute implicitly calgextmap; without it, the mosref and most type attribute implicitly
inherits, of course, from the name attribute (e.g., P.1201.1 inherits, of course, from the name attribute (e.g., P.1201.1
[P.1201.1] indicates lower resolution used while P.1201.2 [P.1201.2] [P.1201.1] indicates lower resolution used while P.1201.2 [P.1201.2]
indicates higher resolution used) or payload type carried in the indicates higher resolution used) or payload type carried in the
segment extension (e.g.,EVRC-WB [RFC5188] indicates using Wideband segment extension (e.g.,EVRC-WB [RFC5188] indicates using Wideband
Codec). However not all payload types or MOS algorithm names Codec). However not all payload types or MOS algorithm names
indicate resolution to be used and mos type to be used. indicate resolution to be used and mos type to be used. If an
answerer receives an offer with an mosref attribute value it doesn't
If an answerer receives an offer with an mosref attribute value it support (e.g.,the answerer only supports "l" and receives "h"from
doesn't support (e.g.,the answerer only supports "l" and receives offerer), the answer SHOULD reject the mosref attribute value offered
"h"from offerer), the answer SHOULD reject the mosref attribute value by the offerer.
offered by the offerer.
If the answerer wishes to reject a mosref attribute offered by the If the answerer wishes to reject a mosref attribute offered by the
offerer, it sets identifiers associated with segment extensions in offerer, it sets identifiers associated with segment extensions in
the answer to the value in the range 4096-4351. The rejected answer the answer to the value in the range 4096-4351. The rejected answer
MUST contain 'mosref ' attribute whose value is the value of the SDP MUST contain 'mosref ' attribute whose value is the value of the SDP
offer. offer.
Local identifiers in the valid range inclusive in an offer or answer Local identifiers in the valid range inclusive in an offer or answer
must not be used more than once per media section. A session update must not be used more than once per media section. A session update
MAY change the direction qualifiers of segment extensions under use. MAY change the direction qualifiers of segment extensions under use.
skipping to change at page 13, line 49 skipping to change at page 14, line 22
Note that the range 4096-4351 for these negotiation identifiers is Note that the range 4096-4351 for these negotiation identifiers is
deliberately restricted to allow expansion of the range of valid deliberately restricted to allow expansion of the range of valid
identifiers in future. Segment extensions with an identifier outside identifiers in future. Segment extensions with an identifier outside
the valid range cannot, of course, be used. the valid range cannot, of course, be used.
Example (port numbers, RTP profiles, payload IDs and rtpmaps, etc. Example (port numbers, RTP profiles, payload IDs and rtpmaps, etc.
all omitted for brevity): all omitted for brevity):
The offer: The offer:
a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:4906=P1201_l,calg:4906=P1202_l, a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:4906=P1201_l,calg:4906=P1202_l, calg:
calg:4907=G107 4907=G107
The answerer is interested in transmission P.1202.1 on lower The answerer is interested in transmission P.1202.1 on lower
resolution application, but doesn't support P.1201.1 on lower resolution application, but doesn't support P.1201.1 on lower
resolution application at all. It is interested in transmission resolution application at all. It is interested in transmission
G.107. It therefore adjusts the declarations: G.107. It therefore adjusts the declarations:
a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:1=P1202_l,calg:2=G107 a=rtcp-xr:mos-metrics=calg:1=P1202_l,calg:2=G107
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
skipping to change at page 16, line 18 skipping to change at page 16, line 48
7. Authors 7. Authors
This draft merges ideas from two drafts addressing the MOS Metric This draft merges ideas from two drafts addressing the MOS Metric
Reporting issue. The authors of these drafts are listed below (in Reporting issue. The authors of these drafts are listed below (in
alphabetical order): alphabetical order):
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 >
Roland Schott < roland.schott@telekom.de >
Qin Wu < sunseawq@huawei.com > Qin Wu < sunseawq@huawei.com >
Roland Schott < roland.schott@telekom.de >
Glen Zorn < gwz@net-zen.net > Glen Zorn < gwz@net-zen.net >
Kai Lee < leekai@ctbri.com.cn >
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the comments and contributions The authors gratefully acknowledge the comments and contributions
made by Bruce Adams, Philip Arden, Amit Arora, Bob Biskner, Kevin made by Bruce Adams, Philip Arden, Amit Arora, Bob Biskner, Kevin
Connor, Claus Dahm, Randy Ethier, Roni Even, Jim Frauenthal, Albert Connor, Claus Dahm, Randy Ethier, Roni Even, Jim Frauenthal, Albert
Higashi, Tom Hock, Shane Holthaus, Paul Jones, Rajesh Kumar, Keith Higashi, Tom Hock, Shane Holthaus, Paul Jones, Rajesh Kumar, Keith
Lantz, Mohamed Mostafa, Amy Pendleton, Colin Perkins, Mike Ramalho, Lantz, Mohamed Mostafa, Amy Pendleton, Colin Perkins, Mike Ramalho,
Ravi Raviraj, Albrecht Schwarz, Tom Taylor, Bill Ver Steeg, David R Ravi Raviraj, Albrecht Schwarz, Tom Taylor, Bill Ver Steeg, David R
Oran, Ali Begen and Hideaki Yamada. Oran, Ted Lemon,Benoit Claise, Pete Resnick, Ali Begen and Hideaki
Yamada.
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 17, line 23 skipping to change at page 18, line 10
Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, May 2008. Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, May 2008.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.
[RFC6776] Wu, Q., "Measurement Identity and information Reporting [RFC6776] Wu, Q., "Measurement Identity and information Reporting
using SDES item and XR Block", RFC 6776, October 2012. using SDES item and XR Block", RFC 6776, October 2012.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[BS.1387] ITU-R, "Method for objective measurements of perceived [BS.1387-1]
audio quality], ITU-R Recommendation BS.1387-1, 2001 ITU-R, "Method for objective measurements of perceived
audio quality", ITU-R Recommendation BS.1387-1, 2001.
[ETSI] ETSI, "Quality of Service (QoS) measurement [ETSI] ETSI, "Quality of Service (QoS) measurement
methodologies", ETSI TS 101 329-5 V1.1.1, November 2000. methodologies", ETSI TS 101 329-5 V1.1.1, November 2000.
[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.107.1] ITU-T, "Wideband E-model", ITU-T Recommendation G.107.1, [G.107.1] ITU-T, "Wideband E-model", ITU-T Recommendation G.107.1,
December 2011. December 2011.
skipping to change at page 19, line 12 skipping to change at page 19, line 49
[TTC] TTC 201.01 (Japan), "A method for speech quality [TTC] TTC 201.01 (Japan), "A method for speech quality
assessment for Voice over IP". assessment for Voice over IP".
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. MOS Value Metric a. MOS Value Metric
* Metric Name: MOS * Metric Name: MOS in RTP
* Metric Description: The estimated Mean Opinion Score for * Metric Description: The estimated Mean Opinion Score for
multimedia application performance is defined as including the multimedia application performance of RTP stream is defined as
effects of delay,loss, discard,jitter and other effects that including the effects of delay,loss, discard,jitter and other
would affect audio or video quality. effects that would affect audio or video quality.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1, MOS * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1, MOS
value definition [RFCXXXX]. value definition [RFCXXXX].
* Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, MOS value definition * Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, MOS value definition
[RFCXXXX]. [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See * Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See
section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX]. section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for * Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for
measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval
Metric flag. Metric flag.
* Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
b. Segment Type Metric b. Segment Type Metric
* Metric Name: Segment Type * Metric Name: Segment Type in RTP
* Metric Description: It is used to identify the segment type * Metric Description: It is used to identify the segment type of
used in this report block. For more details, see section RTP stream used in this report block. For more details, see
3.2.1, Segment type definition. section 3.2.1, Segment type definition.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1, * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1,
Segment Type definition [RFCXXXX]. Segment Type definition [RFCXXXX].
* Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, Segment Type * Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, Segment Type
definition [RFCXXXX]. definition [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See * Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See
section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX]. section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for * Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for
measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval
Metric flag. Metric flag.
* Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
c. Calculation Algorithm Identifier Metric c. Calculation Algorithm Identifier Metric
* Metric Name: Calculation Algorithm Identifier * Metric Name: RTP Stream Calculation Algorithm Identifier
* Metric Description: It is the local identifier of calculation * Metric Description: It is the local identifier of RTP Stream
Algorithm associated with this segment in the range 1-255 calculation Algorithm associated with this segment in the
inclusive. range 1-255 inclusive.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1, * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1,
Calculation Algorithm ID definition [RFCXXXX]. Calculation Algorithm ID definition [RFCXXXX].
* Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, Calg Algorithm ID * Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, Calg Algorithm ID
definition[RFCXXXX]. definition[RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See * Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See
section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX]. section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for * Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for
measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval
Metric flag. Metric flag.
* Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
d. Payload Type Metric d. Payload Type Metric
* Metric Name: Payload Type * Metric Name: RTP Payload Type
* Metric Description: It is used to identify the format of the * Metric Description: It is used to identify the format of the
RTP payload. For more details, see section 3.2.1, payload RTP payload. For more details, see section 3.2.1, payload
type definition. type definition.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1, * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.1,
Payload type definition [RFCXXXX]. Payload type definition [RFCXXXX].
* Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, payload type * Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.1, payload type
definition[RFCXXXX]. definition[RFCXXXX].
skipping to change at page 21, line 9 skipping to change at page 22, line 11
* Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for * Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for
measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval
Metric flag. Metric flag.
* Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
e. Channel Identifier Metric e. Channel Identifier Metric
* Metric Name: Payload Type * Metric Name: Audio Channel Identifier in RTP
* Metric Description: It is used to identify each channel * Metric Description: It is used to identify each audio channel
carried in the same media stream. For more details, see carried in the same RTP stream. For more details, see section
section 3.2.2, channel identifier definition. 3.2.2, channel identifier definition.
* Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.2, * Method of Measurement or Calculation: See section 3.2.2,
Channel Identifier definition [RFCXXXX]. Channel Identifier definition [RFCXXXX].
* Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.2, channel identifier * Units of Measurement: See section 3.2.2, channel identifier
definition[RFCXXXX]. definition[RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See * Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: See
section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX]. section 3, 2nd paragraph [RFCXXXX].
* Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for * Measurement Timing: See section 3, 3rd paragraph [RFCXXXX] for
measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval measurement timing and section 3.1 [RFCXXXX] for Interval
Metric flag. Metric flag.
* Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX]. * Use and applications: See section 1.4 [RFCXXXX].
* Reporting model: See RFC3611. * Reporting model: See RFC3611.
Appendix B. Change Log Appendix B. Change Log
B.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-13 B.1. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-14
o Incorporated comments from Gen Art review The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Amended SDP description in 4.1 o Add some texts to address IESG review comments.
o Overall clean up
B.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 B.2. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Replace QoE metrics with MoS metrics.
o Replace QoE metrics with MOS metrics.
B.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-09 B.3. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-09
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Address comments recieved from WGLC, PM-DIR Review and SDP review. o Address comments recieved from WGLC, PM-DIR Review and SDP review.
o Change an existing SDP attribute 'extmap' to new SDP attribute o Change an existing SDP attribute 'extmap' to new SDP attribute
'calgextmap' and add new SDP attribute registry. 'calgextmap' and add new SDP attribute registry.
o Add Reference to G.107.1, P.862.1, P.862.2 and P.863 for new o Add Reference to G.107.1, P.862.1, P.862.2 and P.863 for new
calculation algorithms. calculation algorithms.
o Add MOS type attribute to distinguish different MOS type. o Add MoS type attribute to distinguish different MoS type.
o Other Editorial changes. o Other Editorial changes.
B.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-08 B.4. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-08
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Remove mostype attribute from SDP extension since it can inferred o Remove mostype attribute from SDP extension since it can inferred
from payload type. from payload type.
o Clarify mosref attribute usage in the O/A. o Clarify mosref attribute usage in the O/A.
B.5. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-07 B.5. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-07
skipping to change at page 22, line 44 skipping to change at page 24, line 4
The following are the major changes compared to previous version: The following are the major changes compared to previous version:
o Add one new reference to support TTC JJ201.01. o Add one new reference to support TTC JJ201.01.
o Update two references P.NAMS and P.NBAMS. o Update two references P.NAMS and P.NBAMS.
o Other Editorial changes based on comments applied to PDV and Delay o Other Editorial changes based on comments applied to PDV and Delay
drafts. drafts.
B.9. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-02 B.9. 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.
B.10. draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-01 B.10. 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.
 End of changes. 60 change blocks. 
145 lines changed or deleted 148 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/