Network Working Group R. Huang
Internet-Draft Q. Wu
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: June 21, 2013 H. Asaeda
NICT
G. Zorn, Ed.
Network Zen
December 18, 2012
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for MPEG
Transport Stream Decodability Statistics Metric reporting
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-04
Abstract
An MPEG Transport Stream (TS) is a standard container format used in
the transmission and storage of multimedia data. Unicast/Multicast/
Broadcast MPEG-TS over RTP is widely deployed in IPTV systems. This
document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR)
Block that allows the reporting of MPEG Transport Stream decodability
statistics metrics related to transmissions of MPEG-TS over RTP.
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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 June 21, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. MPEG Transport Stream Decodability Metrics . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. MPEG Transport Stream Decodability Statistics Metric
Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. SDP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Atrribute Extension . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Offer/Answer Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
1. Introduction
1.1. MPEG Transport Stream Decodability Metrics
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) has
defined a set of syntax and information consistency tests and
corresponding indicators [ETSI] that are recommended for the
monitoring of MPEG-2 Transport Streams [ISO-IEC.13818-1.2007]. The
tests and corresponding indicators are grouped according to priority:
o First priority - Necessary for de-codability (basic monitoring)
o Second priority - Recommended for continuous or periodic
monitoring
o Third priority - Recommended for application-dependant monitoring
This memo is based on information consistency tests and resulting
indicators defined by ETSI [ETSI] and defines a new block type to
augment those defined in Freidman, et al. [RFC3611] for use with
Transport Stream (TS) [ISO-IEC.13818-1.2007]. The new block type
supports reporting of the number of occurrences of each indicator in
the first and second priorities; third priority indicators are not
supported.
1.2. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports
The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550]. [RFC3611]
defined an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended
Report (XR). This document defines a new Extended Report block for
use with [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].
1.3. Performance Metrics Framework
The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the
definition and specification of performance metrics. The RTP
Monitoring Architectures [RFC6792] provides guideline for reporting
block format using RTCP XR. The new report block described in this
memo is in compliance with the monitoring architecture specified in
[RFC6792] and the Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390].
1.4. Applicability
These metrics are applicable to any type of RTP application that uses
the MPEG-TS standard format for multimedia data; for example, MPEG4
TS content over RTP. This new block type can be useful for measuring
content stream or TS quality by checking TS header information [ETSI]
and identifying the existence, and characterizing the severity, of
bitstream packetization problems which may affect users' perception
of a service delivered over RTP; it may also be useful for verifying
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
the continued correct operation of an existing system management
tool.
2. Terminology
2.1. Standards Language
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
3. MPEG Transport Stream Decodability Statistics Metric Report Block
This block reports MPEG transport stream decodability statistics
metrics beyond the information carried in the standard RTCP packet
format, which are measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.
It defines eight metrics based on ETSI TR 101 290. Information is
reported about basic monitoring parameters necessary to ensure that
the TS can be decoded including:
o Transport Stream Synchronization Losses
o Sync byte errors
o Continuity count errors
and continuous monitoring parameters including:
o Transport errors
o Program Clock Reference (PCR) errors
o PCR repetition errors
o PCR discontinuity indicator errors
o Presentation Time Stamp (PTS) errors
The other parameters are ignored since they do not apply to all MPEG
implementations. For further information on these parameters, see
[ETSI].
The MPEG-TS Decodability Metrics Block has the following format:
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BT=TSDM | Reserved | block length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| begin_seq | end_seq |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Number of TSs |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TS_sync_loss_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sync_byte_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Continuity_count_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Transport_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCR_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCR_repetition_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCR_discontinuity_indicator_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PTS_error_count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
block type (BT): 8 bits
A TR 101 290 MPEG-TS decodability metrics report block is
identified by the constant <TSDM>.
Reserved: 8 bits
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
SHOULD be ignored by the receiver.
block length: 16 bits
The constant 11, in accordance with the definition of this field
in Section 3 of RFC 3611. The block MUST be discarded if the
block length is set to a different value.
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
SSRC of source: 32 bits
As defined in Section 4.1 of RFC 3611.
begin_seq: 16 bits
As defined in Section 4.1 of RFC 3611.
end_seq: 16 bits
As defined in Section 4.1 of RFC 3611.
Number of TSs: 32 bits
Number of TS in the above sequence number interval.
TS_sync_loss_count: 32 bits
Number of TS_sync_loss errors in the above sequence number
interval. It is calculated based on the occurrence of errors for
"TS_sync_loss"parameter defined in the section 5.2.1 of ETSI TR
101 290 (See section 5.5.1 of ETSI TR 101 290).
Sync_byte_error_count: 32 bits
Number of sync_byte_errors in the above sequence number interval.
It is calculated in the same way as TS_sync_loss_count, i.e.,based
on the occurrence of errors for "Sync_byte_error"parameter defined
in the section 5.2.1 of ETSI TR 101 290.
Continuity_count_error_count: 32 bits
Number of Continuity_count_errors in the above sequence number
interval. Simiarly, it is calculated based on the occurrence of
errors for "Continuity_count_error"parameter defined in the
section 5.2.1 of ETSI TR 101 290.
Transport_error_count: 32 bits
Number of Transport_errors in the above sequence number interval.
Simiarly, it is calculated based on the occurrence of errors for
"Transport_error" parameter defined in the section 5.2.2 of ETSI
TR 101 290.
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
PCR_error_count: 32 bits
Number of PCR_errors in the above sequence number interval.
Simiarly, it is calculated based on the occurrence of errors for
"PCR_error"parameter defined in the section 5.2.2 of ETSI TR 101
290.
PCR_repetition_error_count: 32 bits
Number of PCR_repetition_errors in the above sequence number
interval. Simiarly, it is calculated based on the occurrence of
errors for "PCR_repetition_error"parameter defined in the section
5.2.2 of ETSI TR 101 290.
PCR_discontinuity_indicator_error_count: 32 bits
Number of PCR_discontinuity_indicator_errors in the above sequence
number interval. Simiarly, it is calculated based on the
occurrence of errors for
"PCR_discontinuity_indicator_error"parameter defined in the
section 5.2.2 of ETSI TR 101 290.
PTS_error_count: 32 bits
Number of PTS_errors in the above sequence number interval.
Simiarly, it is calculated based on the occurrence of errors for
"PTS_error"parameter defined in the section 5.2.2 of ETSI TR 101
290.
4. SDP Signaling
RFC 3611 defines the use of SDP (Session Description Protocol)
[RFC4566] for signaling the use of RTCP XR blocks. However XR blocks
MAY be used without prior signaling (See section 5 of RFC3611).
4.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Atrribute Extension
This session augments the SDP attribute "rtcp-xr" defined in Section
5.1 of RFC 3611 by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to
signal the use of the report block defined in this document.
xr-format =/ ts-decodability-metrics
ts-decodability-metrics = "ts-decodability-metrics"
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
4.2. Offer/Answer Usage
When SDP is used in offer-answer context, the SDP Offer/Answer usage
defined in [RFC3611] for unilateral "rtcp-xr" attribute parameters
applies. For detailed usage of Offer/Answer for unilateral
parameter, refer to section 5.2 of [RFC3611].
5. IANA Considerations
New report block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration.
For general guidelines on IANA allocations for RTCP XR, refer to
Section 6.2 ofRFC 3611.
This document assigns one new block type value in the "RTP Control
Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR) Block Type Registry " Registry:
Name: TSDM
Long Name: TR 101 290 MPEG Transport Stream Decodability Metrics
Value <TSDM>
Reference: Section 3
This document also registers one SDP [RFC4566] parameters for the
"rtcp-xr" attribute in the "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports
(RTCP XR) Session Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters Registry":
* "ts-decodability-metrics"
The contact information for the registrations is:
Qin Wu
sunseawq@huawei.com
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, JiangSu 210012 China
6. Security Considerations
This proposed RTCP XR report block introduces no new security
considerations beyond those described in RFC 3611.
7. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Ray van Brandenburg, Claire Bi,Colin Perkin and Dan
Romascanufor useful review and suggestions.
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[ETSI] ETSI, "Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Measurement
guidelines for DVB systems", Technical Report TR 101 290,
2001.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003.
[RFC3611] Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control
Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", RFC 3611,
November 2003.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
8.2. Informative References
[ISO-IEC.13818-1.2007]
International Organization for Standardization,
"Information technology - Generic coding of moving
pictures and associated audio information: Systems",
ISO International Standard 13818-1, October 2007.
[RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Guidelines for Considering New
Performance Metric Development", BCP 170, RFC 6390,
October 2011.
[RFC6792] Wu, Q., Hunt, G., and P. Arden, "Guidelines for Use of the
RTP Monitoring Framework", RFC 6792, November 2012.
Authors' Addresses
Rachel Huang
Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing 210012
China
Email: rachel.huang@huawei.com
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RTCP XR Decodability Report Blocks December 2012
Qin Wu
Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
China
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
Hitoshi Asaeda
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi
Koganei, Tokyo 184-8795
Japan
Email: asaeda@nict.go.jp
Glen Zorn (editor)
Network Zen
227/358 Thanon Sanphawut
Bang Na, Bangkok 10260
Thailand
Phone: +66 (0) 909-201060
Email: glenzorn@gmail.com
Huang, et al. Expires June 21, 2013 [Page 10]