INTERNET-DRAFT Satoshi Futemma draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt Eisaburo Itakura Andrew Leung Sony Corporation July 16, 2004 Expires: January 16, 2005 RTP Payload Format for JPEG 2000 Video Streams Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. 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 a "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html Abstract This document describes an RTP payload format for transporting JPEG 2000 video streams, formed as a continuous series of JPEG 2000 still images. The payload format presented in this document has three features: (1) Improvement of robustness to packet loss by intelligently fragmenting JPEG 2000 packet units, (2) Persistency of main header to minimize loss effect and maximize recovery and (3) Priority information field for scalable delivery from the same codestream. These will allow for the scalability and robustness of JPEG 2000 images to be maximized in video streaming applications. Futemma, et al. [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................. 3 1.1 Conventions Used in this Document ..................... 6 2. JPEG 2000 Video Features .................................. 6 3. Payload Design ............................................ 6 4. Payload Format ............................................ 7 4.1 RTP fixed header usage ................................ 7 4.2 RTP Payload Header Format ............................. 7 5. RTP Packetization ......................................... 10 5.1 Non-Intelligent Mode .................................. 10 5.2 Intelligent mode ..................................... 11 6. Scalable Delivery and Priority field ...................... 12 6.1 Priority Mapping Table ................................ 12 6.1.1 Default Priority Mapping ............................ 13 6.1.2 User-defined Priority Table ......................... 13 6.2 Sender Action ......................................... 13 6.3 Receiver Action ....................................... 14 7. JPEG 2000 Main Header Compensation Scheme ................. 14 7.1 Sender Processing ..................................... 14 7.2 Receiver Processing ................................... 15 8. Security Consideration .................................... 15 9. IANA Consideration ........................................ 16 9.1 MIME Registration ..................................... 16 9.2 SDP Parameters ........................................ 17 10. Intellectual Property Right Statement .................... 17 11. Informative Appendix .................................... 17 11.1 Recommended Practices ................................ 18 11.2 Sample Headers in Detail ............................. 18 11.2.1 Sample 1: Image with single tile ................... 19 11.2.2 Sample 2: Image with 4 tiles ....................... 20 11.2.3 Sample 3: Packing multiple tiles in single payload . 22 11.2.4 Sample 4: Non-intelligent packing .................. 24 13. References .............................................. 25 14. Authors' Addresses ....................................... 25 15. Copyright Statement ...................................... 25 Futemma, et al. [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 1. Introduction This document specifies a payload format for JPEG 2000 video streams over Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP). JPEG 2000 is an ISO/IEC International Standard developed for next-generation still image encoding. Its basic encoding technology is described in [1]. Part 3 of the JPEG 2000 standard defines Motion JPEG 2000[6]. However, Part 3 defines only the file format but not the transmission format for streaming on the Internet. It is necessary to define an RTP format for JPEG 2000 video streams. JPEG 2000 supports many powerful features that are not supported in the current JPEG standard[1][7]. o Higher compression efficiency than JPEG with less visual loss especially at extreme compression ratios. o A single codestream that offers both lossy and superior lossless compression. o Robust transmission over noisy environments. o Progressive transmission by pixel accuracy (SNR scalability) and/or resolution. o Random codestream access and processing. The JPEG 2000 algorithm is briefly explained below. Fig. 1 shows a block diagram of JPEG 2000 encoding method. +-----+ | ROI | +-----+ | V +----------+ +----------+ +------------+ |DC, comp. | | Wavelet | | | raw image ==> |transform-|==>|transform-|==>|Quantization|==+ | ation | | ation | | | | +----------+ +----------+ +------------+ | | +-----------+ +----------+ +------------+ | | | | | | | | JPEG 2000 <==| Data |<==|Arithmetic|<==|Coefficient |<=+ codestream | Ordering | | coding | |bit modeling| +-----------+ +----------+ +------------+ Fig. 1: A block diagram of the JPEG 2000 encoder Each color component or tile is transformed into wavelet Futemma, et al. [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 coefficients. The component or tile is sub-sampled into various levels usually vertically and horizontally from high frequencies (which contains all the sharp details) to the low frequencies (which contains all the flat areas.) Quantization is performed on the coefficients within each sub-band. The wavelet coefficient is divided by the quantization step size and the result is truncated. After quantization, code blocks are formed from within the precincts within the tiles. (Precincts are a finer separation than tiles and code blocks are the smallest separation of the image data.) Entropy coding is performed within each code block and arithmetically encoded by bit plane. After the coefficients of all code blocks have been coded into a short bit stream, a header is added turning it into a packet, which we call a "jp2-packet" to distinguish between it and a network packet in this document. The header has all the information needed to decompress the packet into code blocks. The standard has four ways to transmit and decode a compressed image: by resolution, quality, position, or component. Packets can be ordered in any way to maximize these features. This is only to serve as an introduction to JPEG 2000 and to aid in understanding the rest of this document. Further details of the encoder can be found in various texts on JPEG 2000 [1]. To decompress a JPEG 2000 codestream, one would follow the reverse order of the encoding order, minus the quantization step. JPEG 2000 standard allows one encoded image to be decoded at different resolutions, bit-rates, with different regions without decoding any more than the minimum necessary amount of data. It is outside the scope of this document to describe in detail this procedure. Please refer to various JPEG 2000 texts for further details [1]. As shown in Fig. 2, a JPEG 2000 codestream is structured from the main header beginning with the SOC marker, one or more tiles, and the EOC marker to indicate the end of the codestream. Each tile consists of a tile-part header that starts with the SOT marker and ends with a SOD marker, and bitstream (a series of jp2-packet). +-- +------------+ Main | | SOC | Required as the first marker. header| +------------+ | | main | Main header marker segments +-- +------------+ | | SOT | Required at the beginning of each Tile- | +------------+ tile-part header. part | | T0,TP0 | Tile 0, tile-part 0 header marker header| +------------+ segments | | SOD | Required at the end of each tile-part +-- +------------+ header | bitstream | Tile-part bitstream +-- +------------+ Futemma, et al. [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 | | SOT | Tile- | +------------+ part | | T1,TP0 | header| +------------+ | | SOD | +-- +------------+ | bit stream | +------------+ | EOC | Required as the last marker in the code +------------+ stream Fig. 2: A construction of the JPEG 2000 codestream 1.1 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 [2]. 2. JPEG 2000 Video Features JPEG 2000 video streams are formed as a continuous series of JPEG 2000 still images. The previously described features of JPEG 2000 can be used effectively in streaming applications. A JPEG 2000 video stream has the following merits: - In JPEG 2000 the SNR quality is improved dramatically over JPEG at low bit rates. - This is a full intra frame format- each frame is independently compressed - and therefore has a low encoding and decoding delay. - JPEG 2000 has flexible and accurate rate control. This is suitable for traffic control and congestion control during network transmission. - JPEG 2000 can provide its own codestream error resilience markers to aid in codestream recovery outside of other network recovery techniques. 3. Payload Design To provide a payload format that exploits JPEG 2000 video stream, described in the previous section, the following must be taken into consideration: - Provisions for packet loss On the Internet, 5% packet loss is common and this value may become 20% or more. To split JPEG 2000 video streams into RTP Futemma, et al. [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 packets, efficient packetization of the code stream is required to minimize problems in decoding due to missing code-blocks. If the main header is lost in transmission, the image cannot be decoded. A system to compensate for the loss of the main header is required. - A packetizing scheme that maximizes JPEG 2000 functionality A packetizing scheme so that an image can be progressively transmitted and reconstructed progressively by the receiver using JPEG 2000 functionality would be very powerful. It would allow for maximizing performance over various network conditions and variations in computing resources of clients. 4. Payload Format 4.1 RTP fixed header usage 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |V=2|P|X| CC |M| PT | sequence number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | timestamp | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | synchronization source (SSRC) identifier | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | contributing source (CSRC) identifiers | | .... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ For each RTP packet, the RTP fixed header is followed by the JPEG 2000 payload header, which is followed by JPEG 2000 codestream. The RTP header fields that have a meaning specific to a JPEG 2000 video stream are described as follows: Marker bit (M): The marker bit of the RTP fixed header MUST be set to 1 on the last RTP packet of a video frame, and otherwise, it MUST be 0. When transmission is performed by multiple RTP sessions, this bit is 1 in the last packet of the frame in each session. Payload type (PT): The payload type is dynamically assigned by means outside the scope of this document. A payload type in the dynamic range shall be chosen by means of an out of band signaling protocol (e.g., RTSP, SIP, etc.) Timestamp: The RTP timestamp is in units of 90 kHz. The same timestamp must appear in each fragment of a given frame. When a JPEG 2000 image is interlaced, the odd field and the corresponding even field MUST have the same timestamps. The initial value of the timestamp is random to make known plaintext Futemma, et al. [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 attacks on encryption more difficult. 4.2 RTP Payload Header Format 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |X|E|MHF|mh_id|T| priority | tile number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | reserved |tp | fragment offset | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Fig. 3: RTP payload header format for JPEG 2000 X : 1 bit This bit is reserved for future use. This MUST be set to 0. E : 1 bit Enable bit flag. If this bit is set to 1, it means "intelligent packetization" described in Section 5.2. If E bit is 0, it means non-intelligent packetization" and a receiver MUST ignore any other payload header information other than fragment offset. MHF (Main Header Flag) : 2 bits MHF indicates whether a header or piece of a header is in the RTP packet. If there is no header, MHF has a value of 0. If there is just a part of a fragmented header, MHF has a value of 2. If the whole header or last part of a fragmented header in the packet, MHF has a value of 3. MHF with a value 1 is reserved for future use. +---+-------------------------------------------------------+ |MHF| Description | +---+-------------------------------------------------------+ | 0 | no main header in the payload. | | 1 | reserved for future use. | | 2 | the fragmented main header (not last part) is packed. | | 3 | a whole main header or the last part of the | | | fragmented main header is packed. | +---+-------------------------------------------------------+ Table 1: MHF usage values mh_id : 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 Futemma, et al. [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 the coding parameters described in the main header remain unchanged. The initial value of mh_id is random, except for 0. Mh_id value MUST increase by 1 every time a new main header is transmitted. Once the mh_id value is greater than 7, it rolls over and start at 1 again. When mh_id is 0, it has special usage for the receiver. This special usage is described in Section 7 of this document. T (Tile field invalidation flag) : 1 bit T bit indicates whether the tile number field is invalid or not. A sender MUST set T bit to 1 when the tile number field is invalid. There are two cases where the tile number field is invalid. When an RTP packet holds only the main header. In this case, a sender cannot set any number in the tile number field because no JPEG 2000 tile-part bitstream is included in the RTP packet. The other case is that multiple tile-part bitstreams are packed together in an RTP packet. In general, it is advisable to pack only one tile bitstream in an RTP packet, but if the tile-part length is small, it is more efficient to pack together multiple tile-parts in one RTP packet. In this case it is meaningless to assign a number. 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) tile number : 16 bits This field shows the tile number that a bitstream belongs to only when the T bit is 0. A receiver can easily decode an arbitrary tile by checking this field. If T bit is set to 1, a receiver MUST ignore this field. tp (type) : 2 bits This field indicates how a JPEG 2000 image is scanned (meaning - progressive or interlace). Futemma, et al. [Page 8] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 0: An image is progressively scanned. On a computer monitor, it should be displayed as-is at the specified width and height in the JPEG 2000 main header. 1: An image is the odd field of an interlaced video signal. The height specified in the JPEG 2000 main header is half of the height of the entire displayed image. In a receiver, an odd field should be de-interlaced with the even field following it so that lines from each image are displayed alternately. 2: An image is the even field of an interlaced video signal. 3: An image is a single field from an interlaced video signal, intended to be displayed full frame as if it were received as both the odd & even field of the frame. On a computer monitor, each line in the image should be displayed twice, doubling the height of the image. fragment offset : 24 bits This value must be set to the byte offset in the JPEG 2000 data stream contained in this RTP packet. To perform scalable video delivery by using multiple RTP sessions, the offset value from the first byte of the same frame is set for fragment offset. It is possible, to scalably delivery video using multiple RTP sessions, the fragment offset may not start from 0 in some RTP sessions even if the packet is the first one received. 5. RTP Packetization Two packetization modes can be used for a JPEG 2000 RTP packet: non-intelligent mode and intelligent mode. A sender is allowed to packetize the JPEG 2000 codestream in either mode, but MUST not change the mode within the same RTP session. A sender may implement only one mode, but a receiver MUST interpret both modes. 5.1 Non-Intelligent Mode Non-intelligent mode is prepared for a thin sender, which has insufficient CPU resources to parse the JPEG 2000 codestream syntax and to partition the codestream per jp2-packet. In this mode, a sender segments the JPEG 2000 codestream along arbitrary lengths into RTP packets, and E bit flag in the payload header MUST be set to 0. Typically, a sender fragments a JPEG 2000 codestream in a fixed Futemma, et al. [Page 9] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 length. An example of this packetization is below: +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| JPEG 2000 codestream fragment #1 | |header|header | | +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| JPEG 2000 codestream fragment #2 | |header|header | | +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ ... +------+-------+----------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| JPEG 2000 codestream fragment #N | |header|header | | +------+-------+----------------------------------+ Fig. 4: Example of non-intelligent mode packetization A receiver recognizes that the codestream is packetized in non-intelligent mode by checking E bit flag, then RTP packets with same RTP timestamps are de-packetized to the JPEG 2000 codestream using fragment offset in the payload header. In this mode, only fragment offset field is interpreted and all other fields are ignored. If a receiver receives RTP packets each of which has different packetization modes, the receiver should ignore both RTP packets. 5.2 Intelligent mode In Intelligent mode, the JPEG 2000 codestream is packetized by "packetization unit" we introduce newly. A packetization unit is defined as either a JPEG 2000 main header, a tile-part header, or a jp2-packet. First, a sender divides the JPEG 2000 codestream into packetization units by parsing the codestream or by getting information from the encoder, and packs the packetization units into RTP packets. A sender can put an arbitrary number of packetization units into an RTP packet, but it MUST preserve the codestream order. An example of this kind of RTP packet format is below: +------+-------+---------------+---------------+ |RTP |payload| packetization | packetization | |header|header | unit | unit | +------+-------+---------------+---------------+ Fig. 5 An Example of RTP packet format with multiple packetization units If a packetization unit with headers is larger than the MTU size, Futemma, et al. [Page 10] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 it may be fragmented. To pack a fragmented packetization unit, the fragmented unit MUST NOT be packed with the succeeding packetization unit within the same RTP packet. An example of this kind of RTP packet format is below: +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| packetization unit fragment #1 | |header|header | | +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| packetization unit fragment #2 | |header|header | | +------+-------+---------------------------------------+ ... +------+-------+--------------------------------+ |RTP |payload| packetization unit fragment #N | |header|header | | +------+-------+--------------------------------+ Fig. 6 An Example of RTP packet format with a fragmented packetization unit 6. Scalable Delivery and Priority field 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. Jp2-packets contain all compressed image data from a specific: layer, component, resolution level, and/or precinct. The order in which these jp2-packets are found in the codestream is called the "progression order". The ordering of the jp2-packets can progress along four axes: layer, component, resolution level and precinct. The lower the priority value is the higher priority. In other words, 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. 6.1 Priority Mapping Table For the progression order, the priority value for each jp2-packet is given by the priority mapping table. There are two types of priority mapping: default priority mapping and user-defined priority mapping. In principle, the priority mapping table is Futemma, et al. [Page 11] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 negotiated between the sender and the receiver through external protocols (such as: RTSP, SIP, etc), which is not within the scope of this document. However, in some environments such as a multicast video-conference environment, it might be difficult to negotiate the priority-mapping table between senders and receivers. We define the default priority mapping for such a situation. The receiver interprets the priority as a user-defined priority value only when the priority-mapping table has been negotiated and otherwise the receiver interprets as the default priority. 6.1.1 Default Priority Mapping The JPEG 2000 codestream is ordered in a progression order and in the most cases the fore-most jp2-packets are more important than the latter ones. With the default priority mapping, the priority value may be defined as the jp2-packet sequence number, in which the first jp2-packet in a tile MUST be assigned the value 1. For every successive packet this number is incremented by one. When the maximum value (=255) is reached, the number remains at 255. A jp2-packet sequence number is also "hinted" from Nsop of SOP marker segment (Annex A.8.1 [1]) in the JPEG 2000 codestream. 6.1.2 User-defined Priority Table The user-defined priority table is freely defined by users, but priority value 0 MUST be used for packets with headers (the main header and tile-part headers). For example, in the LRCP order codestream with 3 layers, 3 resolutions and 3 components, the user-defined priority table based on pixel accuracy can be defined as below. 3 level of priorities are defined in the below example. priority 1: Layer 0 priority 2: Layer 1 priority 3: Layer 2 As another example, the resolution-based priority table can be defined as below: priority 1: Resolution 0 (1/16 size) priority 2: Resolution 1 (a quarter size) priority 3: Resolution 2 (full size) To change the priority-mapping table, a new priority-mapping table must be sent from the sender to the receiver as needed. 6.2 Sender Action A priority value is given in accordance with the priority mapping table. If multiple jp2-packets are packed into the same RTP Futemma, et al. [Page 12] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 packet, the lowest priority value is set for the priority field. A sender can transmit each priority level packets using separate multiple RTP sessions. For example, in layered multicast a sender can transmit each priority through each multicast group. 6.3 Receiver Action The image architecture provides for the efficient delivery of image data in many applications such as client/server applications. The receiver should decode packets above a certain priority to obtain maximum performance. 7. JPEG 2000 Main Header Compensation Scheme The JPEG 2000 main header has various encoding parameters. A decoder decodes the JPEG 2000 codestream by using the parameters described in the JPEG 2000 main header. If an RTP packet is lost with the JPEG 2000 main header, the corresponding JPEG 2000 codestream cannot be decoded, even if all of the following RTP packets are successfully received. 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 with the same mh_id as the current packet. 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 previous frame. The same value is set in mh_id of the RTP packet in the same frame. 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 lost headers. The mh_id field value SHOULD be saved from the previous frames to be used to recover the current frame's main header, if lost. 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 SHOULD be used to decode the current frame, in case of a lost header. 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. 7.1 Sender Processing The sender must transmit RTP packets with the same mh_id value Futemma, et al. [Page 13] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 unless the encoder parameters are different from the previous frame. The encode 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 [1]. If the encode parameters changes, the sender transmitting RTP packets MUST increment the mh_id value by one. If the mh_id field is set to 0, the receiver MUST not save the main header and MUST NOT compensate for lost headers using the above method. 7.2 Receiver Processing When the receiver receives the main header correctly: the RTP sequence number and the mh_id and main header should be saved except when the mh_id value is 0. Only the last main header that was received correctly SHOULD be saved. When the main header is not received, the receiver compares the current mh_id value (this mh_id can be known by receiving at least one RTP packet) with the saved mh_id value. When the values are the same, decoding may be performed by using the saved main header. 8. Security Consideration RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP specifications[3]. 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 [8]. 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 Futemma, et al. [Page 14] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 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 [9] and in multicast routing protocols to allow a receiver to select which sources are allowed to reach it. 9. IANA Consideration 9.1 MIME Registration This document defines a new RTP payload name and associated MIME type, jpeg2000. The MIME registration form for JPEG 2000 video stream is enclosed below: MIME media type name: video MIME subtype name: jpeg2000 Required parameters: none Optional parameters: none Encoding considerations: JPEG 2000 video stream may be transmitted with RTP as specified in this document. Security considerations: see section 9 of RFC XXXY. Interoperability considerations: JPEG 2000 video stream is a sequence of JPEG 2000 still images. An implementation in compliant with [1] can decode and attempt to display the encoded JPEG 2000 video stream. Published specification: ISO/IEC ITU 15444-1 Applications which use this media type: video streaming and communication Additional information: none Magic number(s): none File extension(s): none Macintosh File Type Code(s): none Futemma, et al. [Page 15] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 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 9.2 SDP Parameters The MIME media type video/jpeg2000 string is mapped to fields in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [4] 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 MUSE be jpeg2000 (the MIME subtype). o The clock rate in the "a=rtpmap" line MUST be 90000. Therefore, an example of media representation in SDP is as follows: m=video 49170/2 RTP/AVP 98 a=rtpmap:98 jpeg2000/90000 10. Intellectual Property Right Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. The IETF has been notified of intellectual property rights claimed Futemma, et al. [Page 16] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 in regard to some or all of the specification contained in this document. For more information consult the online list of claimed rights. 11. Informative Appendix 11.1 Recommended Practices As the JPEG 2000 coding standard is highly flexible, many different but compliant data streams can be produced and still be labeled as a JPEG 2000 data stream. The following is a set of recommendations set forth from our experience in developing JPEG 2000 and this payload specification. Implementations of this standard must handle all possibilities mentioned in this specification. The following is a listing of items an implementation could optimize. Error Resilience Markers The use of error resilience markers in the JPEG 2000 data stream is highly recommended in all situations. Error recovery with these markers is helpful to the decoder and save external resources. Markers such as: RESET, RESTART, and ERTERM. YPbPr Color space The YPbPr color space provides the greatest amount of compression in color with respect to the human visual system. When used with JPEG 2000, the usage of this color space can provide excellent visual results at extreme bit rates. Progression Ordering JPEG 2000 offers many different ways to order the final code stream to optimize the transfer with the presentation. The most useful ordering in our usage cases have been for layer progression and resolution progression ordering. Tiling and Packets JPEG 2000 packets are formed regardless of the encoding method. The encoder has little control over the size of these JPEG 2000 packets as they maybe large or small. Tiling splits the image up into smaller areas and each are encoded separately. With tiles, the JPEG 2000 packet sizes are also reduced. When using tiling, almost all JPEG 2000 packet sizes are an acceptable size (i.e. smaller than the MTU size of most networks.) Futemma, et al. [Page 17] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 11.2 Sample Headers in Detail This section details payload headers for reference. For reference, the payload header is: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |X|E|MHF|mh_id|T| priority | tile number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | reserved |tp | fragment offset | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ For the first packet with the main header, this is what it will look like. Assumptions: - MTU is 1500bytes (ethernet) 11.2.1 Sample 1: Image with single tile Coding parameters: single tile number of components: 3 number of decomposition levels: 5 (6 resolutions) number of layers: 1 the number of jp2-packets: 18 (= 3 x (5+1) x 1) Packetization parameters: intelligent mode priority mapping table: default First Packet: This packet will have the whole main header Payload size: 210 bytes 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| 3 | 5 |1| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF4F FF51 002F 000 .... | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Second Packet: This packet will have a tile header and the first tile part Futemma, et al. [Page 18] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 LLband. jp2-packet seq.: 1-10 Payload size: 1400 bytes 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 | 5 |0| 1 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 210 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0000 0000 0DB3 0001 FF93 ... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Third Packet: This packet will have the next part in the tile, no tile header. jp2-packet seq.: 11-15 Payload size: 1420 bytes 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 | 5 |0| 11 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 1610 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF91 0004 000A E841 4526 4556 9850 C2EA .... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Fourth Packet: Last packet for the image. jp2-packet seq.: 16-18 Payload size: 470 bytes 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 | 5 |0| 16 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 2980 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF91 0004 000F A55D 8B73 3B25 25C7 B9EB .... | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 2FBE B153 FFD9 | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 11.2.2 Sample 2: Image with 4 tiles Futemma, et al. [Page 19] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 Coding parameters: number of tiles: 4 number of components: 3 number of decomposition levels: 5 number of layers: 1 Packetization parameters: intelligent mode First Packet: This packet will have the whole main header. Payload size: 210 bytes 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| 3 | 1 |1| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF4F FF51 002F 000 .... | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Second Packet: This packet will have a first tile part (tile number = 0). Payload size: 1400 bytes 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 | 1 |0| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 210 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0000 0000 0578 0001 FF93 .... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Third Packet: This packet will have a second tile part (tile number = 1) Payload size: 1423 bytes 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 | 1 |0| 0 | 1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 1610 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0001 0000 058F 0001 FF93 .... | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Futemma, et al. [Page 20] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 Fourth Packet: This packet will have a third tile part (tile number = 2) Payload size: 1355 bytes 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 | 1 |0| 0 | 2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 3033 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0002 0000 054B 0001 FF93 .... | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Fifth Packet: This packet will have a fourth tile part (tile number = 3) Payload size: 1288 bytes 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 | 1 |0| 0 | 3 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 4388 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0003 0000 050A 0001 FF93 .... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 11.2.3 Sample 3: Packing multiple tiles in single payload fragmented main header (No header compensation) Coding parameters: number of tiles: 3 Packetization parameters: fragmented main header no header compensation (mh_id = 0) packing multiple tiles in single RTP packet (tile #0 and #1) First Packet: This packet will have the first part of the main header. Payload size: 110 bytes 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| 2 | 0 |1| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Futemma, et al. [Page 21] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF4F FF51 002F 0000 ... | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Second Packet: This packet has the second and the last part of the main header. Paylaod size: 100 bytes 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| 3 | 0 |1| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 110 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF64 00FF .... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Third Packet: This packet has two tiles, 0 and 1 Paylaod size: 1395 bytes 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 |1| 0 | 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 210 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0000 0000 02BD 0001 FF93 ... (Tile #0 bitstream) | | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | FF90 000A 0001 0000 02B6 0001 FF93 ... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ (Tile #1 bitstream) | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | RTP padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Fourth Packet: This packet has one tile, 2 Paylaod size: 1392 bytes 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Futemma, et al. [Page 22] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 |0|1| 0 | 0 |0| 0 | 2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0 | 0 | 1605 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF90 000A 0002 0000 0570 0001 FF93 .... (Tile #2 bitstream) | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 11.2.4 Sample 4: Non-intelligent packing First Packet: This packet has the first part of the image, as much that will fit in the payload Paylaod size: 1452 bytes 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 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |FF4F FF51 002F 000 .... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Second Packet: This has the next 1452 bytes of the image. Paylaod size: 1452 bytes 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 | 1452 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |A534 7910 7785 1977 FF90 ... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Third Packet: This has the last part of the image. Paylaod size: 1096 bytes 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 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Futemma, et al. [Page 23] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 | 0 | 0 | 2904 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |0482 29FA .... | | | | FFD9| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 13. References Normative References [1] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29, ISO/IEC 15444-1 "Information technology - JPEG 2000 image coding system - Part 1: Core coding system", July 2002. [2] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP14, RFC2119, March 1997. [3] H. Schulzrinne, S. Casner, R. Frederick, and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real Time Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003. [4] M. Handley and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998. Informative References [5] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG1, "JPEG2000 Part I Final Committee Draft Version 1.0", http://www.jpeg.org/public/fcd15444-1.pdf, March 2000. [6] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG1, "Motion JPEG 2000 Final Committee Draft 1.0", http://www.jpeg.org/public/fcd15444-3.doc, March, 2001. [7] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG1, "JPEG2000 requirements and profiles version 6.3" [8] Baugher, McGrew, Carrara, Naslund, and Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol," RFC 3711, Internet Engineering Task Force, March 2004. [9] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", STD 5, RFC 1112, August 1989. 14. Authors' Addresses Satoshi Futemma/Eisaburo Itakura/Andrew Leung Sony Corporation 6-7-35 Kitashinagawa Shinagawa-ku Tokyo 141-0001 JAPAN Phone: +81 3 5448 2125 Fax: +81 3 5448 2160 Futemma, et al. [Page 24] INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-05.txt July 16, 2004 Email: {satosi-f|itakura}@sm.sony.co.jp andrew.leung@jp.sony.com 15. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). 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." 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. Futemma, et al. [Page 25]