Closing the RTP Payload Format Media Types IANA Registry
draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry-05

AVTCORE                                                    M. Westerlund
Internet-Draft                                                  Ericsson
Updates: 8088 (if approved)                              18 October 2024
Intended status: Standards Track                                        
Expires: 21 April 2025

        Closing the RTP Payload Format Media Types IANA Registry
               draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry-05

Abstract

   A number of authors of RTP Payload Formats and the WG process have
   failed to ensure that the media types for RTP payload formats is
   registred in the IANA registry "RTP Payload Formats Media Types" as
   recommended by RFC 8088.  To simplify the process and rely only on
   the media types registry this document closes the RTP payload
   specific registry.  In addition it updates the instruction to payload
   format authors in RFC 8088 to reflect this change.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   Status information for this document may be found at
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-
   registry/.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the AVTCORE Working Group
   mailing list (mailto:avt@ietf.org), which is archived at
   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/avt/.  Subscribe at
   https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/gloinul/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry.

Status of This Memo

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

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

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft     Close RTP Payload Formats Registry       October 2024

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 April 2025.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

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

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Update to How To Write an RTP Payload Format  . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   It has been observed that specifications of new Real-time Transport
   Protocol (RTP) payload formats often forget to specify registration
   of the format's media type in the IANA registry "RTP Payload Formats
   Media Types" [RTP-FORMATS] as recommended by [RFC8088].  In practice
   this has no real impact.  This registry is not used for any purpose
   other than to track which media types actually have RTP payload
   formats.  That purpose could be addressed through other means.

   The Media Types registry [MEDIA-TYPES] is the crucial registry to
   register any Media Type to establish the media type used to identify
   the format in various signalling usages, to avoid collisions, and to
   reference their specifications.

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft     Close RTP Payload Formats Registry       October 2024

   To resolve this situation, this document performs the following
   actions.  First, it updates the registry to include known RTP payload
   formats at the time of writing.  Then, it closes the IANA Registry
   for RTP Payload Formats Media Types for future registration.  Beyond
   instructing IANA to close this registry, the instructions to authors
   in [RFC8088] are updated so that registration in the closed registry
   is no longer mentioned.

   The origins of the "RTP Payload Formats Media Types" registry, as
   referenced in [RTP-FORMATS], are unclear.  The registry cites
   [RFC4855] as providing the instructions for its maintenance.
   However, upon reviewing RFC 4855, no text has been found that defines
   the registry's purpose and operational rules.  Further attempts to
   trace the registry's creation have failed to uncover any references
   to its establishment.  It is likely that the registry was created
   based on correspondence via email or at the request of an Area
   Director (AD).  Consequently, there is no known existing
   specification for this registry that requires updating upon its
   closure.

2.  Update to How To Write an RTP Payload Format

   How to write an RTP Payload format [RFC8088] mandates in its section
   on IANA Considerations (Section 7.4) that RTP Payload formats shall
   register in RTP Payload Format media types.  This paragraph is
   changed without affecting its status as part of an informational RFC.
   Thus removing the need to register in the "RTP Payload Format media
   types".

   OLD:

   "Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,
   they also need an IANA Considerations section.  The media type name
   must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA register
   that media name.  When that registration request is written, it shall
   also be requested that the media type is included under the "RTP
   Payload Format media types" sub-registry of the RTP registry
   (http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters)."

   NEW:

   "Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,
   they also need an IANA Considerations section.  The media type name
   must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA register
   that media name in the Media Types registry
   (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml)."

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft     Close RTP Payload Formats Registry       October 2024

3.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to add the following missing RTP Payload types to
   the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].

   +=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+
   | Media Type  | Sub Type | Clock     | Channels | Reference        |
   |             |          | Rate (Hz) | (audio)  |                  |
   +=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+
   | application | flexfec  |           |          | RFC8627          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | EVRCNW   | 16000     |          | RFC6884          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | EVRCNW0  | 16000     |          | RFC6884          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | EVRCNW1  | 16000     |          | RFC6884          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | aptx     |           |          | RFC7310          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | opus     | 48000     |          | RFC7587          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | G711-0   |           |          | RFC7650          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | audio       | flexfec  |           |          | RFC8627          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | text        | flexfec  |           |          | RFC8627          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | text        | ttml+xml |           |          | RFC8759          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | VP8      | 90000     |          | RFC7741          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | AV1      | 90000     |          | [AV1-Media-Type] |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | HEVC     | 90000     |          | RFC7798          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | smpte291 |           |          | RFC8331          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | VVC      | 90000     |          | RFC9328          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | EVC      | 90000     |          | RFC9584          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
   | video       | flexfec  |           |          | RFC8627          |
   +-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+

   Table 1: Payload Types to Register in RTP Payload Format Media Types

   IANA is requested to update the following RTP Payload types in the
   "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft     Close RTP Payload Formats Registry       October 2024

    +============+===========+=================+==========+===========+
    | Media Type | Sub Type  | Clock Rate (Hz) | Channels | Reference |
    |            |           |                 | (audio)  |           |
    +============+===========+=================+==========+===========+
    | audio      | MP4A-LATM |                 |          | RFC6416   |
    +------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+
    | video      | MP4V-ES   | 90000           |          | RFC6416   |
    +------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+

     Table 2: Payload Types to update in RTP Payload Format Media Types

   IANA is further requested to close the "RTP Payload Format Media
   Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS] for any further registrations.  IANA
   should add the following to the existing note for the registry:

   NEW:

   "This registry has been closed as it was considered redundant as all
   RTP Payload formats are part of the Media Types registry
   (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml).
   For further motivation see (RFC-TBD1)."

   In addition, it is requested that the existing note of "RTP Payload
   Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS] is changed in the
   following way:

   OLD: Registration procedures and a registration template can be found
   in [RFC4855].

   NEW: It was previously stated that registration procedures and a
   registration template can be found in [RFC4855].  This is not
   actually the case as discussed by [RFC-TBD1].

   RFC-Editor Note: Please replace RFC-TBD1 with the RFC number of this
   specification and then remove this note.

4.  Security Considerations

   This document has no security considerations as it defines an
   administrative rule change.

5.  References

5.1.  Normative References

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft     Close RTP Payload Formats Registry       October 2024

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8088]  Westerlund, M., "How to Write an RTP Payload Format",
              RFC 8088, DOI 10.17487/RFC8088, May 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8088>.

   [RTP-FORMATS]
              "IANA's registry for RTP Payload Format Media Types",
              November 2023, <https://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-
              parameters/rtp-parameters.xhtml#rtp-parameters-2>.

   [MEDIA-TYPES]
              "IANA's registry for Media Types", November 2023,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-
              types.xhtml>.

   [AV1-Media-Type]
              "IANA Media Type Entry for video/AV1", January 2021,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/video/AV1>.

5.2.  Informative References

   [RFC4855]  Casner, S., "Media Type Registration of RTP Payload
              Formats", RFC 4855, DOI 10.17487/RFC4855, February 2007,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4855>.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   The author likes to thank Jonathan Lennox, Zaheduzzaman Sarker,
   Bernard Aboba, Elwyn Davies, Wes Hardaker, Gunter Van de Velde, Éric
   Vyncke, Mahesh Jethanandani, and Hyunsik Yang for review and
   editorial fixes.

Author's Address

   Magnus Westerlund
   Ericsson
   Email: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com

Westerlund                Expires 21 April 2025                 [Page 6]