?? rfc1890.txt
字號:
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
5.4 MPV
MPV designates the use MPEG-I and MPEG-II video encoding elementary
streams as specified in ISO Standards ISO/IEC 11172 and 13818-2,
respectively. The RTP payload format is as specified in work in
progress [10], Section 3. See the description of the MPA audio
encoding for contact information.
5.5 MP2T
MP2T designates the use of MPEG-II transport streams, for either
audio or video. The encapsulation is described in work in progress,
[10], Section 2. See the description of the MPA audio encoding for
contact information.
5.6 nv
The encoding is implemented in the program 'nv', version 4, developed
at Xerox PARC by Ron Frederick. Further information is available from
the author:
Ron Frederick
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
United States
electronic mail: frederic@parc.xerox.com
6. Payload Type Definitions
Table 2 defines this profile's static payload type values for the PT
field of the RTP data header. A new RTP payload format specification
may be registered with the IANA by name, and may also be assigned a
static payload type value from the range marked in Section 3.
In addition, payload type values in the range 96-127 may be defined
dynamically through a conference control protocol, which is beyond
the scope of this document. For example, a session directory could
specify that for a given session, payload type 96 indicates PCMU
encoding, 8,000 Hz sampling rate, 2 channels. The payload type range
marked 'reserved' has been set aside so that RTCP and RTP packets can
be reliably distinguished (see Section "Summary of Protocol
Constants" of the RTP protocol specification).
An RTP source emits a single RTP payload type at any given time; the
interleaving of several RTP payload types in a single RTP session is
not allowed, but multiple RTP sessions may be used in parallel to
send multiple media. The payload types currently defined in this
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
profile carry either audio or video, but not both. However, it is
allowed to define payload types that combine several media, e.g.,
audio and video, with appropriate separation in the payload format.
Session participants agree through mechanisms beyond the scope of
this specification on the set of payload types allowed in a given
session. This set may, for example, be defined by the capabilities
of the applications used, negotiated by a conference control protocol
or established by agreement between the human participants.
Audio applications operating under this profile should, at minimum,
be able to send and receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4).
This allows interoperability without format negotiation and
successful negotation with a conference control protocol.
All current video encodings use a timestamp frequency of 90,000 Hz,
the same as the MPEG presentation time stamp frequency. This
frequency yields exact integer timestamp increments for the typical
24 (HDTV), 25 (PAL), and 29.97 (NTSC) and 30 Hz (HDTV) frame rates
and 50, 59.94 and 60 Hz field rates. While 90 kHz is the recommended
rate for future video encodings used within this profile, other rates
are possible. However, it is not sufficient to use the video frame
rate (typically between 15 and 30 Hz) because that does not provide
adequate resolution for typical synchronization requirements when
calculating the RTP timestamp corresponding to the NTP timestamp in
an RTCP SR packet [15]. The timestamp resolution must also be
sufficient for the jitter estimate contained in the receiver reports.
The standard video encodings and their payload types are listed in
Table 2.
7. Port Assignment
As specified in the RTP protocol definition, RTP data is to be
carried on an even UDP port number and the corresponding RTCP packets
are to be carried on the next higher (odd) port number.
Applications operating under this profile may use any such UDP port
pair. For example, the port pair may be allocated randomly by a
session management program. A single fixed port number pair cannot be
required because multiple applications using this profile are likely
to run on the same host, and there are some operating systems that do
not allow multiple processes to use the same UDP port with different
multicast addresses.
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
PT encoding audio/video clock rate channels
name (A/V) (Hz) (audio)
_______________________________________________________________
0 PCMU A 8000 1
1 1016 A 8000 1
2 G721 A 8000 1
3 GSM A 8000 1
4 unassigned A 8000 1
5 DVI4 A 8000 1
6 DVI4 A 16000 1
7 LPC A 8000 1
8 PCMA A 8000 1
9 G722 A 8000 1
10 L16 A 44100 2
11 L16 A 44100 1
12 unassigned A
13 unassigned A
14 MPA A 90000 (see text)
15 G728 A 8000 1
16--23 unassigned A
24 unassigned V
25 CelB V 90000
26 JPEG V 90000
27 unassigned V
28 nv V 90000
29 unassigned V
30 unassigned V
31 H261 V 90000
32 MPV V 90000
33 MP2T AV 90000
34--71 unassigned ?
72--76 reserved N/A N/A N/A
77--95 unassigned ?
96--127 dynamic ?
Table 2: Payload types (PT) for standard audio and video encodings
However, port numbers 5004 and 5005 have been registered for use with
this profile for those applications that choose to use them as the
default pair. Applications that operate under multiple profiles may
use this port pair as an indication to select this profile if they
are not subject to the constraint of the previous paragraph.
Applications need not have a default and may require that the port
pair be explicitly specified. The particular port numbers were chosen
to lie in the range above 5000 to accomodate port number allocation
practice within the Unix operating system, where port numbers below
1024 can only be used by privileged processes and port numbers
between 1024 and 5000 are automatically assigned by the operating
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
system.
8. Bibliography
[1] Apple Computer, "Audio interchange file format AIFF-C," Aug.
1991. (also ftp://ftp.sgi.com/sgi/aiff-c.9.26.91.ps.Z).
[2] Office of Technology and Standards, "Telecommunications: Analog
to digital conversion of radio voice by 4,800 bit/second code
excited linear prediction (celp)," Federal Standard FS-1016, GSA,
Room 6654; 7th & D Street SW; Washington, DC 20407 (+1-202-708-
9205), 1990.
[3] J. P. Campbell, Jr., T. E. Tremain, and V. C. Welch, "The
proposed Federal Standard 1016 4800 bps voice coder: CELP,"
Speech Technology , vol. 5, pp. 58--64, April/May 1990.
[4] J. P. Campbell, Jr., T. E. Tremain, and V. C. Welch, "The federal
standard 1016 4800 bps CELP voice coder," Digital Signal
Processing, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 145--155, 1991.
[5] J. P. Campbell, Jr., T. E. Tremain, and V. C. Welch, "The dod 4.8
kbps standard (proposed federal standard 1016)," in Advances in
Speech Coding (B. Atal, V. Cuperman, and A. Gersho, eds.), ch.
12, pp. 121--133, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991.
[6] IMA Digital Audio Focus and Technical Working Groups,
"Recommended practices for enhancing digital audio compatibility
in multimedia systems (version 3.00)," tech. rep., Interactive
Multimedia Association, Annapolis, Maryland, Oct. 1992.
[7] M. Mouly and M.-B. Pautet, The GSM system for mobile
communications Lassay-les-Chateaux, France: Europe Media
Duplication, 1993.
[8] J. Degener, "Digital speech compression," Dr. Dobb's Journal,
Dec. 1994.
[9] S. M. Redl, M. K. Weber, and M. W. Oliphant, An Introduction to
GSM Boston: Artech House, 1995.
[10] D. Hoffman and V. Goyal, "RTP payload format for MPEG1/MPEG2
video," Work in Progress, Internet Engineering Task Force, June
1995.
[11] N. S. Jayant and P. Noll, Digital Coding of Waveforms--
Principles and Applications to Speech and Video Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1984.
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
[12] M. F. Speer and D. Hoffman, "RTP payload format of CellB video
encoding," Work in Progress, Internet Engineering Task Force,
Aug. 1995.
[13] W. Fenner, L. Berc, R. Frederick, and S. McCanne, "RTP
encapsulation of JPEG-compressed video," Work in Progress,
Internet Engineering Task Force, Mar. 1995.
[14] T. Turletti and C. Huitema, "RTP payload format for H.261 video
streams," Work in Progress, Internet Engineering Task Force, July
1995.
[15] H. Schulzrinne, S. Casner, R. Frederick, and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A
transport protocol for real-time applications." Work in Progress,
Mar. 1995.
9. Security Considerations
Security issues are discussed in section 2.
10. Acknowledgements
The comments and careful review of Steve Casner are gratefully
acknowledged.
11. Author's Address
Henning Schulzrinne
GMD Fokus
Hardenbergplatz 2
D-10623 Berlin
Germany
EMail: schulzrinne@fokus.gmd.de
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 1890 AV Profile January 1996
Current Locations of Related Resources
UTF-8
Information on the UCS Transformation Format 8 (UTF-8) is available
at
http://www.stonehand.com/unicode/standard/utf8.html
1016
An implementation is available at
ftp://ftp.super.org/pub/speech/celp_3.2a.tar.Z
DVI4
An implementation is available from Jack Jansen at
ftp://ftp.cwi.nl/local/pub/audio/adpcm.shar
G721
An implementation is available at
ftp://gaia.cs.umass.edu/pub/hgschulz/ccitt/ccitt_tools.tar.Z
GSM
A reference implementation was written by Carsten Borman and Jutta
Degener (TU Berlin, Germany). It is available at
ftp://ftp.cs.tu-berlin.de/pub/local/kbs/tubmik/gsm/
LPC
An implementation is available at
ftp://parcftp.xerox.com/pub/net-research/lpc.tar.Z
Schulzrinne Standards Track [Page 18]
?? 快捷鍵說明
復制代碼
Ctrl + C
搜索代碼
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切換主題
Ctrl + Shift + D
顯示快捷鍵
?
增大字號
Ctrl + =
減小字號
Ctrl + -