Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A and G729 Annex B
RFC 7261
| Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (May 2014; No errata) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Muthu Perumal , Parthasarathi Ravindran | ||
| Last updated | 2015-10-14 | ||
| Replaces | draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-g273-g729 | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text html pdf htmlized bibtex | ||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Ari Keränen | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2013-10-25) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 7261 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | Gonzalo Camarillo | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - No Actions Needed | |
| IANA action state | No IANA Actions | ||
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Perumal
Request for Comments: 7261 Cisco Systems
Category: Standards Track P. Ravindran
ISSN: 2070-1721 NSN
May 2014
Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A and G729 Annex B
Abstract
This document provides the offer/answer considerations for the annexa
parameter of G723 and the annexb parameter of G729, G729D, and G729E
when the value of the annexa or annexb parameter does not match in
the Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer and answer.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7261.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 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
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.
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Offer/Answer Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Considerations for Use of Comfort Noise Frames . . . . . 3
3.2. Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A . . . . . . 3
3.3. Offer/Answer Considerations for G729 Annex B, G729D Annex
B, and G729E Annex B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Offer with G729 annexb=yes and Answer with G729 annexb=no 5
4.2. Offer with G729 annexb=yes and Answer with G729 and No
annexb Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. Offer with G729 and No annexb Parameter and Answer with
G729 annexb=no . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction
[RFC4856] describes the annexa parameter for G723 as follows:
annexa: indicates that Annex A, voice activity detection, is used
or preferred. Permissible values are "yes" and "no" (without the
quotes); "yes" is implied if this parameter is omitted.
Also, [RFC4856] describes the annexb parameter for G729, G729D, and
G729E as follows:
annexb: indicates that Annex B, voice activity detection, is used
or preferred. Permissible values are "yes" and "no" (without the
quotes); "yes" is implied if this parameter is omitted.
However, a problem arises when the value of the annexa or annexb
parameter does not match in the SDP [RFC4566] offer and answer.
For example, if the offer has G729 with annexb=yes and the answer has
G729 with annexb=no, it can be interpreted in two different ways:
o The offerer and answerer proceed as if G729 is negotiated with
annexb=yes, or
o The offerer and answerer proceed as if G729 is negotiated with
annexb=no.
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
Since this is not clear in the existing specifications, various
implementations have interpreted the offer/answer in their own ways,
resulting in a different codec being chosen to call failure, when the
parameter value does not match in the offer and answer.
[RFC3264] requires SDP extensions that define new fmtp parameters to
specify their proper interpretation in offer/answer. This document
specifies the proper interpretation for the annexa and annexb
parameters in offer/answer.
2. Terminology
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].
3. Offer/Answer Considerations
The general objective of the offer/answer considerations is to make
sure that if the offerer or answerer indicates it does not support
Annex A or Annex B, then Annex A or Annex B is not used.
3.1. Considerations for Use of Comfort Noise Frames
[RFC3551] states that:
Receivers MUST accept comfort noise frames if restriction of their
use has not been signaled. The MIME registration for G729 in RFC
3555 specifies a parameter that MAY be used with MIME or SDP to
restrict the use of comfort noise frames.
Hence, if the SDP offer or answer indicates that comfort noise is not
supported, comfort noise frames MUST NOT be used.
3.2. Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A
When the offer or answer has G723 and the annexa parameter is absent,
the offerer or answerer knows that it has implied the default
"annexa=yes". This is because the annexa attribute is part of the
original registration of audio/G723 [RFC4856]. All implementations
that support G723 understand the annexa attribute. Hence, this case
MUST be considered as if the offer or answer has G723 with
annexa=yes.
When the offer has G723 with annexa=yes and the answer has G723 with
annexa=no, the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if G723 is
negotiated with annexa=no.
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
When the offer has G723 with annexa=no, after the offer/answer
completion the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if G723 is
negotiated with annexa=no.
When the offer has G723 with annexa=no, the reason for not
mandating that the answer MUST have annexa=no for G723 is that
there are implementations that omit the annexa parameter in
answer. In such cases, the offerer and answerer proceed as if
G723 is negotiated with annexa=no.
When the offer has G723 with no annexa parameter and the answer has
G723 with annexa=yes, the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if
G723 is negotiated with annexa=yes.
3.3. Offer/Answer Considerations for G729 Annex B, G729D Annex B, and
G729E Annex B
In this section, G729 represents any of G729 or G729D or G729E.
When the offer or answer has G729 and the annexb parameter is absent,
the offerer or answerer knows that it has implied the default
"annexb=yes". This is because the annexb attribute is part of the
original registration of audio/G729 [RFC4856]. All implementations
that support G729 understand the annexb attribute. Hence, this case
MUST be considered as if the offer or answer has G729 with
annexb=yes.
When the offer has G729 with annexb=yes and the answer has G729 with
annexb=no, the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if G729 is
negotiated with annexb=no.
When the offer has G729 with annexb=no, after the offer/answer
completion the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if G729 is
negotiated with annexb=no.
When the offer has G729 with annexb=no, the reason for not
mandating that the answer MUST have annexb=no for G729 is that
there are implementations that omit the annexb parameter in the
answer. In such cases, the offerer and answerer proceed as if
G729 is negotiated with annexb=no.
When the offer has G729 with no annexb parameter and the answer has
G729 with annexb=yes, the offerer and answerer MUST proceed as if
G729 is negotiated with annexb=yes.
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
4. Examples
4.1. Offer with G729 annexb=yes and Answer with G729 annexb=no
[Offer with G729 annexb=yes]
v=0
o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes
[Answer with G729 annexb=no]
v=0
o=bob 1890844326 1890844326 IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 19140 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
a=fmtp:18 annexb=no
In the above example, the offerer and answerer proceed as if G729 is
negotiated with annexb=no.
4.2. Offer with G729 annexb=yes and Answer with G729 and No annexb
Parameter
[Offer with G729 annexb=yes]
v=0
o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
[Answer with G729 and no annexb parameter]
v=0
o=bob 1890844326 1890844326 IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 19140 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
In the above example, the offerer and answerer proceed as if G729 is
negotiated with annexb=yes.
4.3. Offer with G729 and No annexb Parameter and Answer with G729
annexb=no
[Offer with G729 and no annexb parameter]
v=0
o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
[Answer with G729 annexb=no]
v=0
o=bob 1890844326 1890844326 IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
s=
c=IN IP4 host.bangalore.example.com
t=0 0
m=audio 19140 RTP/AVP 18
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
a=fmtp:18 annexb=no
In the above example, the offerer and answerer proceed as if G729 is
negotiated with annexb=no.
5. Security Considerations
The guidelines described in [RFC6562] are to be followed for Use of
Voice Activity Detection (i.e., Annex A or Annex B) with the Secure
Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP).
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
6. Acknowledgments
Thanks to Flemming Andreasen (Cisco), Miguel A. Garcia (Ericsson),
Ali C. Begen (Cisco), Paul Kyzivat (Huawei), Roni Even (Huawei),
Kevin Riley (Sonus), Ashish Sharma (Sonus), Kevin P. Fleming
(Digium), Dale Worley (Avaya), Cullen Jennings (Cisco), Ari Keranen
(Ericsson), Harprit S. Chhatwal (InnoMedia), Aurelien Sollaud
(Orange), SM, Stephen Casner, Keith Drage (Alcatel-Lucent), Stephen
Farrell, Barry Leiba, and Ted Lemon for their valuable input and
comments. Martin Dolly (ATT) and Hadriel Kaplan (Acme Packet)
provided useful suggestions at the mic at IETF 83.
7. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June
2002.
[RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
July 2003.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
[RFC4856] Casner, S., "Media Type Registration of Payload Formats in
the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences", RFC
4856, February 2007.
[RFC6562] Perkins, C. and JM. Valin, "Guidelines for the Use of
Variable Bit Rate Audio with Secure RTP", RFC 6562, March
2012.
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 7261 Offer/Answer G723 AnnexA and G729 AnnexB May 2014
Authors' Addresses
Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
Cisco Systems
Cessna Business Park
Sarjapur-Marathahalli Outer Ring Road
Bangalore, Karnataka 560103
India
EMail: mperumal@cisco.com
Parthasarathi Ravindran
NSN
Manyata Embassy Business park
Bangalore, Karnataka 560045
India
EMail: partha@parthasarathi.co.in
Perumal & Ravindran Standards Track [Page 8]