Audio Video Transport A. Leung
Internet-Draft S. Futemma
Expires: January 19, 2006 E. Itakura
Sony
July 18, 2005
Enhanced Payload Format for Priority & Header Processing RTP Payload
Format for JPEG 2000 Video Streams BEAM extension
draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-beam-01
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
This document may not be modified, and derivative works of it may not
be created.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 19, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This memo describes extended uses for payload header in RFCXXXY, An
RTP Payload Format for JPEG 2000 Video, for better support of JPEG
2000 features such as scalability and includes a main header recovery
method.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
This memo MUST be accompanied with an implementation of RFCXXXY for a
complete implementation. RFCXXXY itself is a complete description of
the payload header and signaling, this document only describes
additional processing for the payload header. There is an additional
MIME and SDP marker signaling for implementations of this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Description of the Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.1 Main Header Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.2 Priority Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Payload Format Enhanced Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1 Enhanced Processing Markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Priority Mapping Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1 Pre-Defined Priority Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.1 Packet Number Based Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.2 Progression Based Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.3 Layer Based Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.4 Resolution Based Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.1.5 Component Based Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 Application Specific Priority Table . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. JPEG 2000 Main Header Compensation Scheme . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1 Sender Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Receiver Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Security Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. IANA Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.1 MIME Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.2 SDP Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1.1 Example 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1.2 Example 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A. Sample Headers in Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 27
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
1. Introduction
This document is an extension of RFCXXXY, An RTP Payload Format for
JPEG 2000 Video. There are additional mechanisms to be used with
certain parts of the header in RFCXXXY to support JPEG 2000 features
such as scalability and a main header recovery method. These
mechanisms are described in detail in this document.
1.1 History
In the development of RFCXXXY, Sony Corporation filed a patent
application on certain mechanisms with the main header recovery,
priority table usage, etc. in RFCXXXY. As these are not "essential"
to the core RTP format of RFCXXXY and only describes a mechanism, it
was decided that splitting these mechanisms from the core RTP format
(essentially IPR free) into another document (IPR). This is the
document describing the IPR related mechanisms for main header
recover, priority table usage, etc.
1.2 Description of the Mechanisms
1.2.1 Main Header Compensation
JPEG 2000's scalable coding scheme allows for decompressing truncated
or partial data streams but only when the main header is present. If
the header is lost, the data is useless. With JPEG 2000 video
coding, coding parameters between frames will rarely change and
previous headers may be used in newly received data which the header
have been lost.
A recovery of the main header that has been lost is very simple with
this procedure. In the case of JPEG 2000 video, it is common that
encode parameters will not vary greatly between each successive
frame. Even if the RTP packet including the main header of a frame
has been dropped, decoding may be performed by using the main header
of a previous frame.
1.2.2 Priority Table
JPEG 2000 codestream has rich functionality built into it so decoders
can easily handle scalable delivery or progressive transmission.
Progressive transmission allows images to be reconstructed with
increasing pixel accuracy or spatial resolution. This feature allows
the reconstruction of images with different resolutions and pixel
accuracy, for different target devices. A single image source can
provide a codestream that is easily processed for smaller image
display devices.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
JPEG 2000 packets contain all compressed image data from a specific:
layer, component, resolution level, and/or precinct. The order in
which these JPEG 2000 packets are found in the codestream is called:
progression order. The ordering of the JPEG 2000 packets can
progress along four axes: layer, component, resolution and precinct
(or position).
Providing a priority field to indicate the importance of data
contained in a given RTP packet can aid in usage of JPEG 2000
progressive and scalable functions.
1.3 Conventions Used in This Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [1].
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
2. Payload Format Enhanced Processing
2.1 Enhanced Processing Markers
This section of the document describes changes in the value of mh_id
and priority value and interpretation which differ from RFCXXXY.
Implementions of this document should follow protocol in RFCXXXY
first then add in additional header processing as described in this
document. Implementations following this document are expected to
seamlessly work with implementations of RFCXXXY and this document as
well.
The RTP payload header format for JPEG 2000 video stream is as
follows:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|tp |MHF|mh_id|T| priority | tile number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|reserved | fragment offset |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: RTP payload header format for JPEG 2000
mh_id (Main Header Identification) : 3 bits
Main header identification value. This is used for JPEG 2000 main
header recovery.
The same mh_id value is used as long as the coding parameters
described in the main header remains unchanged between frames.
The initial value of mh_id is random, and may take any value
between 1-7, but MUST NOT be 0.
The mh_id value MUST increment by 1 every time a new main header
is transmitted. Once the mh_id value is greater than 7, it rolls
over to 1.
When mh_id is 0, it has special usage for the receiver. This
special usage is described in Section 4.2 of this document.
Senders should follow Section 4.1 of this document for proper
mh_id usage.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
priority : 8 bits
The priority field indicates the importance of the JPEG 2000
packet included in the payload. Typically, a higher priority is
set in the packets containing JPEG 2000 packets containing the
lower sub-bands.
Special values of priority:
0: This is reserved for payload which contain a header (main or
tile part header.) This is considered the highest importance.
1 to 255: These values decrease in importance as the values
increase. (i.e. 1 is more important than 2, etc.) Hence
applying priority values should correlate directly to JPEG 2000
codestream in importance in basic usage.
The lower the priority value is the higher the priority. Simply,
the priority value 0 is the highest priority and 255 is the lowest
priority. We define the priority value 0 as a special priority
value for the headers (the main header or tile-part header). When
any headers (the main header or tile-part header) are packed into
the RTP packet, the sender MUST set the priority value to 0.
Assignment of the values are described in Section 3 with pre-
defined table assignments in Section 3.1.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
3. Priority Mapping Table
For the progression order, the priority value for each JPEG 2000
packet is given by the priority mapping table.
3.1 Pre-Defined Priority Mapping
This document specify several commonly-used priority mapping tables,
pre-defined priority mapping tables: packet number based (default),
progression-based, layer-based, resolution-based, component-based.
Packet number priority mapping is REQUIRED to be supported by clients
implementing this specification. Other priority mapping tables
(progression, layer, resolution, and component based) are OPTIONAL to
implementations of this specification.
Rules that all implementations of this specification MUST follow in
all priority modes:
o When there is a header in the packet with a JPEG 2000 packet, the
sender MUST set the payload packet priority value to 0.
o When there are multiple JPEG 2000 packets in the same RTP payload
packet, the sender MUST set the payload packet priority value to
the lowest priority value of the lowest JPEG 2000 packet. (i.e. if
JPEG 2000 packets with priority: 5,6,7 are packed into a single
payload, the priority value MUST be 5.)
3.1.1 Packet Number Based Ordering
This is the default mode for payload packet priority value and all
implementation of this specification MUST support.
The sender will have a one-to-one association between payload packet
priority value and the payload packet value (i.e. the JPEG 2000
codestream.) The RTP packet value is equal to the JPEG 2000 packet
value.
If the packet value of JPEG 2000 codestream is greater than 255, the
sender MUST set the payload priority value to 255.
3.1.2 Progression Based Ordering
The sender will assign the payload packet priority value only based
on layer, resolution, and component ordering of the codestream.
This is similar to the JPEG 2000 packet number based format but will
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
not take into account the precinct number or position in the JPEG
2000 codestream.
For example:
If the codestream is ordered in LRCP (Layer, Resolution, Component,
Position)
All the packets in:
layer 0
resolution 0
component 0
then the packet priority value : 1
All the packets in:
layer 0
resolution 0
component 1
then the packet priority value : 2
All the packets in:
layer 0
resolution 0
component 2
then the packet priority value : 3
3.1.3 Layer Based Ordering
Layer-based priority mapping table simplifies the default mapping to
just matching JPEG 2000 packets together from the same layer.
For example:
All the packets in layer 0 : packet priority value : 1
All the packets in layer 1 : packet priority value : 2
All the packets in layer 2 : packet priority value : 3
...
All the packets in layer n : packet priority value : n+1
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
3.1.4 Resolution Based Ordering
Resolution-based priority mapping table is similar to the layer based
order but for JPEG 2000 packets of the same resolution
For example:
All the packets in resolution 0 : packet priority value : 1
All the packets in resolution 1 : packet priority value : 2
All the packets in resolution 2 : packet priority value : 3
...
All the packets in resolution n : packet priority value : n+1
3.1.5 Component Based Ordering
Component-based priority mapping table is mapping together JPEG 2000
components of the same component
For example:
All the packets in component 0 : packet priority value : 1
All the packets in component 1 : packet priority value : 2
All the packets in component 2 : packet priority value : 3
...
All the packets in component n : packet priority value : n+1
3.2 Application Specific Priority Table
The application specific priority table specification is intended for
experimental use as new applications and new priority mapping tables
are developed.
A case sensitive 8 character ASCII code describing the application
specific priority mapping name. The description of these application
specific priority tables are outside the scope of this document.
This extension may be used when the codestream is divided into many
layers and many resolutions.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
4. JPEG 2000 Main Header Compensation Scheme
The mh_id field of the payload header is used to recognize whether
the encoding parameters of the main header are the same as the
encoding parameters of the previous frame. The same value is set in
mh_id of the RTP packet in the same frame. The mh_id and encode
parameters are not associated with each other as 1:1 but they are
used to recognize whether the encode parameters of the previous frame
are the same or not in the event of a lost header.
The mh_id field value SHOULD be saved from previous frames to be used
to recover the current frame's main header. If the mh_id of the
current frame has the same value as the mh_id value of the previous
frame, the previous frame's main header MAY be used to decode the
current frame, in case of a lost header in the current frame.
The sender MUST increment mh_id when parameters in the header change
and send a new main header accordingly.
The receiver MAY use the mh_id and MAY retain the header for such
compensation.
4.1 Sender Processing
The sender MUST transmit RTP packets with the same mh_id value unless
the encoder parameters are different from the previous frame. The
encoding parameters are the fixed information marker segment (SIZ
marker) and functional marker segments (COD, COC, RGN, QCD, QCC, and
POC) specified in JPEG 2000 Part 1 Annex A [2]. An initial value of
mh_id MUST be selected randomly between 1 and 7 for security reasons.
If the encode parameters changes, the sender transmitting RTP packets
MUST increment the mh_id value by one, but when mh_id value becomes
greater than 7, a sender MUST set mh_id value to 1.
4.2 Receiver Processing
When the receiver receives the main header completely, the RTP
sequence number, the mh_id and main header should be saved. Only the
last main header that was received completely SHOULD be saved. When
the mh_id value is 0, the receiver SHOULD NOT save the header.
When the main header is not received, the receiver may compare the
current payload header's mh_id value with the previous saved mh_id
value. If the values match, decoding may be performed by using the
previously saved main header.
If the mh_id field is set to 0, the receiver MUST not save the main
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
header and MUST NOT compensate for lost headers.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
5. Security Consideration
RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification
are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP
specifications[3] and any applicable profile. This implies that
confidentiality of the media streams is achieved by encryption. Data
compression used with this payload format is applied end-to-end,
encryption may be performed on the compressed data so there is no
conflict between the two operations.
A potential denial-of-service threat exists for data encodings using
compression techniques that have non-uniform receiver-end
computational load. The attacker can inject pathological datagrams
into the stream which are complex to decode and cause the receiver to
be overloaded. The usage of authentication of at least the RTP
packet is RECOMMENDED, for example with SRTP [2].
If QoS enhanced service is used, RTP receivers SHOULD monitor packet
loss to ensure that the service that was requested is actually being
delivered. If it is not, then they SHOULD assume that they are
receiving best-effort service and behave accordingly.
If best-effort service is being used, users of this payload format
MUST monitor packet loss to ensure that the packet loss rate is
within acceptable parameters. Packet loss is considered acceptable
if a TCP flow across the same network path, experiencing the same
network conditions, would achieve an average throughput, measured on
a reasonable timescale, that is not less than the RTP flow is
achieving. This condition can be satisfied by implementing
congestion control mechanisms to adapt the transmission rate (or the
number of layers subscribed for a layered multicast session), or by
arranging for a receiver to leave the session if the loss rate is
unacceptably high.
As with any IP-based protocol, in some circumstances a receiver may
be overloaded simply by receiving too many packets, either desired or
undesired. Network-layer authentication may be used to discard
packets from undesired sources, but the processing cost of the
authentication itself may be too high. In a multicast environment,
pruning of specific sources may be implemented in future versions of
IGMP [7] and in multicast routing protocols to allow a receiver to
select which sources are allowed to reach it.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
6. IANA Consideration
6.1 MIME Registration
This document defines a new RTP payload name and associated MIME
type, jpeg2000.
The receiver MUST ignore any unspecified parameter.
The MIME registration form for JPEG 2000 video stream is enclosed
below:
MIME media type name: video
MIME subtype name: jpeg2000
REQUIRED parameters: BEAM
'BEAM': Implmentations of this standard must include this option
in the parameter list when establishing a session. If this option
is supported, by the receiver/sender, both should reply with this
option in the MIME parameter list. If the answer omits this in
the MIME parameter list, the answerer does not support this option
Encoding considerations:
JPEG 2000 video stream may be transmitted with RTP as specified in
this document.
Security considerations: see section 9 of RFC AXXX.
Interoperability considerations:
JPEG 2000 video stream is a sequence of JPEG 2000 still images.
An implementation in compliant with [2] can decode and attempt to
display the encoded JPEG 2000 video stream.
Published specification: ISO/IEC 15444-1 | ITU-T Rec. T.800
Applications which use this media type:
video streaming and communication
Additional information: none
Magic number(s): none
File extension(s): none
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Macintosh File Type Code(s): none
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Eisaburo Itakura, Satoshi Futemma
Email: {itakura|satosi-f}@sm.sony.co.jp
Intended usage: COMMON
Author/Change controller:
Eisaburo Itakura, Satoshi Futemma
Email: {itakura|satosi-f}@sm.sony.co.jp
6.2 SDP Parameters
In addition to SDP Parameters section in RFCXXXY:
The MIME media type video/jpeg2000 string is mapped to fields in the
Session Description Protocol (SDP) [5] as follows:
o The media name in the "m=" line of SDP MUST be video.
o The encoding name in the "a=rtpmap" line of SDP MUST be jpeg2000
(the MIME subtype).
o The clock rate in the "a=rtpmap" line MUST be 90000.
o The REQUIRED parameters "BEAM" MUST be included in the "a=fmtp"
line of SDP.
o The OPTIONAL parameters "priority-table-default", "priority-table-
definition", "priority-table-protocol", MUST be included in the
"a=fmtp" line of SDP.
These parameters are expressed as a MIME media type string, in the
form of a semicolon separated list of parameter=value pairs.
Therefore, an example of media representation in SDP is as follows:
m=video 49170/2 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000
a=fmtp:98 BEAM;sampling=YCbCr-4:2:0;width=128;height=128
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
7. Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model
In addition to SDP Offer/Answer section in RFCXXXY:
When offering JPEG 2000 over RTP using SDP in an Offer/Answer model
[6], the following rules and limitations apply:
o All parameters MUST have an acceptable value for that parameter.
o All parameters MUST correspond to the parameters of the payload.
o The parameters "BEAM" MUST appear in the offer if the parameter
"BEAM" is not in the answer, receivers should not process the
header according to this document. Senders SHOULD continue to
send data with payload headers according to mechanisms outlined in
this document. This is highly recommended for multicast streams
where not all receivers are of the same type.
7.1 Examples
Offer/Answer example exchanges are provided.
7.1.1 Example 1
Alice offers BEAM functionality, YCbCr 422 color space, interlace
image with 720-pixel width and 480-pixel height and several priority-
table options (jp2-packet, progression, layer, resolution, component)
as below:
v=0
o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.anywhere.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.anywhere.com
t=0 0
m=video 49170 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000
a=fmtp:98 BEAM;sampling=YCbCr-4:2:2;interlace
a=fmtp:98 priority-table-definition=jp2-packet,progression,layer,
resolution,component; width=720; height=480
Bob accepts BEAM functionality, YCbCr-4:2:2 color space,interlace
image and jp2-packet based priority mapping (default mapping table)
and replies:
v=0
o=bob 2890844730 2890844731 IN IP4 host.example.com
s=
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
c=IN IP4 host.example.com
t=0 0
m=video 49920 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000
a=fmtp:98 BEAM;sampling=YCbCr-4:2:2;interlace
Note that "priority-table-definition" parameter in Bob's answer is
omitted, so default priority mapping table (jp2-packet number based
priority mapping) is used.
7.1.2 Example 2
Alice offers YCbCr 420 color space, progressive image with 320-pixel
width and 240-pixel height and layer priority-table options as below:
v=0
o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.anywhere.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.anywhere.com
t=0 0
m=video 49170 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000
a=fmtp:98 BEAM;sampling=YCbCr-4:2:0
a=fmtp:98 priority-table-definition=layer; width=320; height=240
Bob does not accept BEAM functionality but accepts YCbCr-4:2:0 color
space,interlace image and layer based priority mapping and replies:
v=0
o=bob 2890844730 2890844731 IN IP4 host.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.example.com
t=0 0
m=video 49920 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000
a=fmtp:98 sampling=YCbCr-4:2:2
Note that "BEAM" parameter was not in Bob's answer so Alice must not
use settings described in this document for sending or receiving.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
8. References
8.1 Normative References
[1] Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29, ISO/IEC 15444-1 | ITU-T Rec. T.800,
"Information Technology - JPEG 2000 Image Coding System - Part
1: Core Coding System", December 2000.
[3] Schulzrinne, Casner, Frederick, and Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport
Protocol for Real Time Applications", RFC 3550, STD 64,
July 2003.
[4] Baugher, McGrew, Naslund, Carrara, and Norrman, "The Secure
Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP", RFC 3711, March 2004.
[5] Handley and Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol",
RFC 2327, April 1998.
[6] Rosenberg and Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session
Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 2002.
8.2 Informative References
[7] Deering, "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", RFC 1112,
August 1989.
Authors' Addresses
Andrew Leung
Sony Corporation
6-7-35 Kitashinagawa
Shinagawa-ku
Tokyo 141-0001
Japan
Phone: +81 3 5448 2125
Email: andrew.leung@jp.sony.com
URI: http://www.sony.com/
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Satoshi Futemma
Sony Corporation
6-7-35 Kitashinagawa
Shinagawa-ku
Tokyo 141-0001
Japan
Phone: +81 3 5448 2125
Email: satosi-f@sm.sony.co.jp
URI: http://www.sony.com/
Eisaburo Itakura
Sony Corporation
6-7-35 Kitashinagawa
Shinagawa-ku
Tokyo 141-0001
Japan
Phone: +81 3 5448 2125
Email: itakura@sm.sony.co.jp
URI: http://www.sony.com/
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Appendix A. Sample Headers in Detail
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|tp |MHF|mh_id|T| priority | tile number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|reserved | fragment offset |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2
First Packet: This packet will have the whole main header. 210bytes
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 0|1 1|1 0 1|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF4FFF51002F000 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3
Second Packet: This packet will have a tile header and the first tile
part LLband 1500bytes
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 0|1 1|1 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0000 0000 2DB3 0001 FF93 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Third Packet: This packet will have the next part in the tile, no
tile header 1500bytes
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 0|0 0|1 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|E841 4526 4556 9850 C2EA .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5
Fourth Packet: Last packet for the image 290bytes
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 0|0 0|1 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A55D 8B73 3B25 25C7 B9EB .... 2FBEB153|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6
First Packet: This packet will have the whole main header. 210bytes
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 0|1 1|0 0 1|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF4FFF51002F000 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Second Packet: This packet will have a first tile part (tile 0)
1400bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0000 0000 0578 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 8
Third Packet: This packet will have a second tile part (tile 1)
1423bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0001 0000 058F 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 9
Fourth Packet: This packet will have a third tile part (tile 2)
1355bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0002 0000 054B 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 10
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Fifth Packet: This packet will have a fourth tile part (tile 3)
1290bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 1|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0003 0000 050A 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 11
First Packet: This packet will have the first part of the main
header. 110bytes
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 0|0 1|0 0 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF4FFF51002F000 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 12
Second Packet: This packet has the second part of the header.
1400bytes
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 0|1 0|0 0 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF6400FF .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 13
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Third Packet: This packet has two tiles, tile 0 and tile 1 1400bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0000 0000 02BC 0001 FF93 ... |
|FF90 000A 0001 0000 02BC 0001 FF93 ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 14
Fourth Packet: This packet has one tile, tile 2 1395bytes
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 0|0 0|0 0 0|0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0002 0000 0573 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 15
First packet: This packet will have the whole main header for the odd
field 210bytes
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|1 1|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF4FFF51002F000 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 16
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Second packet: This packet will have the first part of the odd
field's tile 1400bytes
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|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0000 0000 0578 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 17
Third packet: This packet will have the second part of the odd
field's tile 1400bytes
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|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|7F04 E708 27D9 D11D 22CB ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 18
Fourth packet: This packet will have the third part of the odd
field's tile 1300bytes
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|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|98BD EC9B 2826 DC62 D4AB ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 19
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Fifth packet: This packet will have the whole main header for the
even field
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 0|1 1|0 1 1|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF4FFF51002F000 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 20
Sixth packet: This packet will have the first part of the odd field's
tile 1400bytes
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 0|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FF90 000A 0000 0000 0578 0001 FF93 .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 21
Seventh packet: This packet will have the second part of the odd
field's tile 1400bytes
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 0|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|626C 42F0 166B 6BD0 F8E1 ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 22
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Eighth packet: This packet will have the third part of the odd
field's tile 1300bytes
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 0|0 0|0 1 0|1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|8114 41D5 18AB 4A1B ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 23
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft JPEG 2000 RTP BEAM July 2005
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Leung, et al. Expires January 19, 2006 [Page 27]
