TOC 
Audio/Video Transport WorkingG. Hunt
GroupBT
Internet-DraftA. Clark
Intended status: Standards TrackTelchemy
Expires: April 30, 2009October 27, 2008


RTCP XR Report Block for Discard metric Reporting
draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-00.txt

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.

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 April 30, 2009.

Abstract

This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block that allows the reporting of a simple discard count metric for use in a range of RTP applications.



Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
    1.1.  Discard Report Block
    1.2.  RTCP and RTCP XR Reports
    1.3.  Performance Metrics Framework
    1.4.  Applicability
2.  Definitions
3.  Discard Metric Report Block
    3.1.  Report Block Structure
    3.2.  Definition of Fields in Discard Metric Report Block
4.  SDP Signaling
5.  IANA Considerations
6.  Security Considerations
7.  Contributors
8.  References
    8.1.  Normative References
    8.2.  Informative References
§  Authors' Addresses
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements




 TOC 

1.  Introduction



 TOC 

1.1.  Discard Report Block

This draft defines a new block type to augment those defined in [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.) for use in a range of RTP applications. The new block type supports the reporting of the number of packets which are received correctly but are never played out, typically because they arrive too late to be played out (buffer underflow) or too early (buffer overflow). The metric is applicable both to systems which use packet loss repair techniques (such as forward error correction [RFC5109] (Li, A., “RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error Correction,” December 2007.) or retransmission [RFC4588] (Rey, J., “RTP Retransmission Payload Format,” July 2006.)) and to those which do not.

This metric is useful for identifying the existence, and characterising the severity, of a packet transport problem which may affect users' perception of a service delivered over RTP.

The metric belongs to the class of transport-related terminal metrics defined in [MONARCH] (work in progress).

Instances of this Metrics Block refer by tag to the separate auxiliary Measurement Identity block [MEASIDENT] (Hunt, G., “RTCP XR Measurement Identifier Block,” August 2008.) which contains information such as the SSRC of the measured stream, and RTP sequence numbers and time intervals indicating the span of the report.

The Measurement Identity block provides extended sequence numbers for the beginning and end of both Interval and Cumulative reporting periods. This allows systems receiving the report to calculate the number of packets expected.



 TOC 

1.2.  RTCP and RTCP XR Reports

The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550] (Schulzrinne, H., “RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications,” July 2003.). [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.) defined an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended Report (XR). This draft defines a new Extended Report block that MUST be used as defined in [RFC3550] (Schulzrinne, H., “RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications,” July 2003.) and [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.).



 TOC 

1.3.  Performance Metrics Framework

The Performance Metrics Framework [PMOLFRAME] (Clark, A., “Framework for Performance Metric Development,” July 2008.) provides guidance on the definition and specification of performance metrics. Metrics described in this draft either reference external definitions or define metrics generally in accordance with the guidelines in [PMOLFRAME] (Clark, A., “Framework for Performance Metric Development,” July 2008.).



 TOC 

1.4.  Applicability

This metric is believed to be applicable to a large class of RTP applications which use a jitter buffer.



 TOC 

2.  Definitions

Received, Lost and Discarded

A packet shall be regarded as lost if it fails to arrive within an implementation-specific time window. A packet that arrives within this time window but is too early or late to be played out shall be regarded as discarded. A packet shall be classified as one of received (or OK), discarded or lost. The Discard Metric counts only discarded packets. The metric "cumulative number of packets lost" defined in [RFC3550] (Schulzrinne, H., “RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications,” July 2003.) reports a count of lost packets in the primary media stream. Another metric defined in [POSTREPAIRLOSS] (Hunt, G., “RTCP XR Report Block for Post-Repair Loss metric Reporting,” October 2008.) is available to report on packets which are not recovered by any repair techniques which may be in use. If Voice Activity Detection is used then the proportion of packets lost and discarded shall be determined based on transmitted packets, i.e. packets that contained silence and were not transmitted shall not be considered, because they do not form part of the RTP sequence.



 TOC 

3.  Discard Metric Report Block



 TOC 

3.1.  Report Block Structure



    0               1               2               3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     BT=ND     |I| tag | resv  |       block length=1          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                   number of packets discarded                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 Figure 1: Report Block Structure 



 TOC 

3.2.  Definition of Fields in Discard Metric Report Block

block type (BT): 8 bits

A Discard Metric Report Block is identified by the constant ND.

[Note to RFC Editor: please replace ND with the IANA provided RTCP XR block type for this block.]

Interval Metric flag (I): 1 bit

This field is used to indicate whether the Discard metric is an Interval or a Cumulative metric, that is, whether the reported value applies to the most recent measurement interval duration between successive metrics reports (I=1) (the Interval Duration) or to the accumulation period characteristic of cumulative measurements (I=0) (the Cumulative Duration). Numerical values for both these intervals are provided in the Measurement Identifier block referenced by the tag field below.

Measurement Identifier association (tag): 3 bits

This field is used to identify the Measurement Identifier block [MEASIDENT] (Hunt, G., “RTCP XR Measurement Identifier Block,” August 2008.) which describes this measurement. The relevant Measurement Identifier block has the same tag value as the Discard Metric block. Note that there may be more than one Measurement Identifier block per RTCP packet.

Reserved (resv): 4 bits

These bits are reserved. They SHOULD be set to zero by senders and MUST be ignored by receivers.

block length: 16 bits

The length of this report block in 32-bit words minus one. For the Discard Metric block, the block length is equal to 1.

Number of packets lost: 32 bits

Number of packets discarded over the period (Interval or Cumulative) covered by this report.

If the measured value exceeds 0xFFFFFFFD, the value 0xFFFFFFFE SHOULD be reported to indicate an over-range measurement. If the measurement is unavailable, the value 0xFFFFFFFF SHOULD be reported.

Note that the number of packets expected in the period covered by the metric (whether interval or cumulative) is available from the difference between a pair of extended sequence numbers in the Measurement Identity block, so need not be repeated in this block.



 TOC 

4.  SDP Signaling

[RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.) defines the use of SDP (Session Description Protocol) [RFC4566] (Handley, M., “SDP: Session Description Protocol,” July 2006.) for signaling the use of XR blocks. XR blocks MAY be used without prior signaling.

This section augments the SDP [RFC4566] (Handley, M., “SDP: Session Description Protocol,” July 2006.) attribute "rtcp-xr" defined in [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.) by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to signal the use of the report block defined in this document.

rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=" "rtcp-xr" ":" [xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF

(defined in RFC3611)

xr-format = xr-format / xr-pd-block

xr-pd-block = "xr-pd"



 TOC 

5.  IANA Considerations

This document creates a new block type within the IANA "RTCP XR Block Type Registry" called the Discard Metric Block, and a new parameter xr-pd within the "RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry".



 TOC 

6.  Security Considerations

It is believed that this proposed RTCP XR report block introduces no new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.). This block does not provide per-packet statistics so the risk to confidentiality documented in Section 7, paragraph 3 of [RFC3611] (Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” November 2003.) does not apply.



 TOC 

7.  Contributors

The authors gratefully acknowledge the comments and contributions made by Bruce Adams, Philip Arden, Amit Arora, Bob Biskner, Kevin Connor, Claus Dahm, Randy Ethier, Roni Even, Jim Frauenthal, Albert Higashi, Tom Hock, Shane Holthaus, Paul Jones, Rajesh Kumar, Keith Lantz, Mohamed Mostafa, Amy Pendleton, Colin Perkins, Mike Ramalho, Ravi Raviraj, Albrecht Schwarz, Tom Taylor, and Hideaki Yamada.



 TOC 

8.  References



 TOC 

8.1. Normative References

[MEASIDENT] Hunt, G., “RTCP XR Measurement Identifier Block,” ID draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-measid-00, August 2008.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., “RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications,” RFC 3550, July 2003.
[RFC3611] Friedman, T., “RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR),” RFC 3611, November 2003.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., “SDP: Session Description Protocol,” RFC 4566, July 2006.


 TOC 

8.2. Informative References

[MONARCH] Hunt, G., “Monitoring Architectures for RTP,” ID draft-hunt-avt-monarch-01, August 2008.
[PMOLFRAME] Clark, A., “Framework for Performance Metric Development,” ID draft-ietf-pmol-metrics-framework-00, July 2008.
[POSTREPAIRLOSS] Hunt, G., “RTCP XR Report Block for Post-Repair Loss metric Reporting,” ID draft-ietf-rtcp-xr-postrepair-loss-00, October 2008.
[RFC4588] Rey, J., “RTP Retransmission Payload Format,” RFC 4588, July 2006.
[RFC5109] Li, A., “RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error Correction,” RFC 5109, December 2007.


 TOC 

Authors' Addresses

  Geoff Hunt
  BT
  Orion 1 PP9
  Adastral Park
  Martlesham Heath
  Ipswich, Suffolk IP4 2TH
  United Kingdom
Phone:  +44 1473 608325
Email:  geoff.hunt@bt.com
  
  Alan Clark
  Telchemy Incorporated
  2905 Premiere Parkway, Suite 280
  Duluth, GA 30097
  USA
Email:  alan.d.clark@telchemy.com


 TOC 

Full Copyright Statement

Intellectual Property