idnits 2.17.1 draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (September 15, 2011) is 4604 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4566 (Obsoleted by RFC 8866) == Outdated reference: A later version (-22) exists of draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group Q. Wu 3 Internet-Draft Huawei 4 Intended status: Standards Track G. Zorn 5 Expires: March 18, 2012 Network Zen 6 R. Schott 7 Deutsche Telekom Laboratories 8 K. Lee 9 China Telecom 10 September 15, 2011 12 RTCP XR Blocks for multimedia quality metric reporting 13 draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03 15 Abstract 17 This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block and associated SDP 18 parameters that allow the reporting of multimedia quality metrics for 19 use in a range of RTP applications. 21 Status of this Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 18, 2012. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 Table of Contents 55 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 2.1. Standards Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 3. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 4. Synthetical Multimedia Quality Metrics Block . . . . . . . . . 4 60 4.1. Metric Block Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 4.2. Definition of Fields in Multimedia Quality Metrics 62 Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 5. SDP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 65 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 66 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 67 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 68 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 69 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 71 A.1. draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03 . . . . . . 8 72 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 74 1. Introduction 76 This draft defines a new block type to augment those defined in 77 [RFC3611], for use in a range of RTP applications. 79 The new block type provides information on multimedia quality using 80 one of several standard metrics. 82 The metrics belong to the class of application level metrics defined 83 in [MONARCH] (work in progress). 85 2. Terminology 87 2.1. Standards Language 89 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 90 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 91 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 93 3. Applicability 95 The Multimedia Quality Metrics Report Block can be used in any real- 96 time AV application. 98 The factors that affect real-time AV application quality can be split 99 into two categories. The first category consists of transport- 100 dependent factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter (which also 101 translates into losses in the playback buffer). The factors in the 102 second category are application-specific factors that affect real 103 time application (e.g., video) quality and are sensitivity to network 104 errors. These factors can be but not limited to video codec and loss 105 recovery technique, coding bit rate, packetization scheme, and 106 content characteristics. 108 Compared with application-specific factors, the transport-dependent 109 factors sometimes are not sufficient to measure real time data 110 quality, since the ability to analyze the real time data in the 111 application layer provides quantifiable measurements for subscriber 112 Quality of Experience (QoE) that may not be captured in the 113 transmission layers or from the RTP layer down. In a typical 114 scenario, monitoring of the transmission layers can produce 115 statistics suggesting that quality is not an issue, such as the fact 116 that network jitter is not excessive. However, problems may occur in 117 the service layers leading to poor subscriber QoE. Therefore 118 monitoring using only network-level measurements may be insufficient 119 when application layer content quality is required. 121 In order to provide accurate measures of real time application 122 quality when transporting real time contents across a network, the 123 synthentical multimedia quality Metrics is highly required which can 124 be conveyed in the RTCP XR packets[RFC3611] and may have the 125 following three benefits: 127 o Tuning the content encoder algorithm to satisfy real time data 128 quality requirements 129 o Determining which system techniques to use in a given situation 130 and when to switch from one technique to another as system 131 parameters change 132 o Verifying the continued correct operation of an existing system 134 4. Synthetical Multimedia Quality Metrics Block 136 This block reports the multimedia application performance or quality 137 metrics beyond the information carried in the standard RTCP packet 138 format. Information is recorded about multimedia application QoE 139 metric which is expressed as a MOS ("Mean Opinion Score"), MOS is on 140 a scale from 1 to 5, in which 5 represents excellent and 1 represents 141 unacceptable. MOS scores are usually obtained using subjective 142 testing or using objective algorithm to estimate the multimedia 143 quality. However Subjective testing is not suitable for measuring 144 the multimedia quality since the results may vary from test to test. 145 Therefore using objective algorithm to calculate MOS scores is 146 recommended. ITU-T recommendation [G.1082][P.NAMS][P.NBAMS] defines 147 a methodology for verifying the performance of QoE estimation 148 algorithms for video and audio. Hence this document recommends 149 vendors and implementers to use these International Telecommunication 150 Union (ITU)-specified methodologies to measure parameters when 151 possible. 153 4.1. Metric Block Structure 155 The report block contents are dependent upon a series of flag bits 156 carried in the first part of the header. Not all parameters need to 157 be reported in each block. Flags indicate which are and which are 158 not reported. The fields corresponding to unreported parameters MUST 159 be present, but are set to zero. The receiver MUST ignore any 160 Perceptual Quality Metrics Block with a non-zero value in any field 161 flagged as unreported. 163 The Synthetical Multimedia Quality Metrics Block has the following 164 format: 166 0 1 2 3 167 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 1 168 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 169 | BT=TBD |I| MC | Rsd.| block length | 170 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 171 | SSRC of source | 172 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 173 | MOS Value | 174 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 176 4.2. Definition of Fields in Multimedia Quality Metrics Block 178 Block type (BT): 8 bits 180 The Perceptual Quality Metrics Block is identified by the constant 181 . 183 Interval Metric flag (I): 1 bit 185 This field is used to indicate whether the Basic Loss/Discard 186 metrics are Interval or Cumulative metrics, that is, whether the 187 reported values applies to the most recent measurement interval 188 duration between successive metrics reports (I=1) (the Interval 189 Duration) or to the accumulation period characteristic of 190 cumulative measurements (I=0) (the Cumulative Duration). 192 MoS Class (MC): 4 bits 194 This field is used to indicate the MOS type to be reported. The 195 MOS type is defined as follows: 197 0000 MOS-A - Audio Quality MOS [G.107][P.564]. 198 0001 MOS-V - Video Quality MOS [P.NAMS][P.NBAMS]. 199 0010 MOS-AV - Audio-Video Quality MOS[P.NAMS][P.NBAMS]. 200 0100~1111 - Reserved for future definitions. 202 If new MOS types are defined, they can be added by an update to 203 this document. If the receiver does not understand the MOS type 204 defined in this document it should discard this report. 206 Rsd.:3 bits 208 This field is reserved for future definition. In the absence of 209 such a definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and 210 MUST be ignored by the receiver. 212 SSRC of source: 32 bits 214 As defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC3611]. 216 MOS Value: 32 bits 218 The estimated mean opinion score for Audio Qulity, Video Quality 219 or Audio-Video quality is defined as including the effects of 220 delay and other effects that would affect Audio-Video quality 221 [G.1082][P.NAMS][P.NBAMS]. It is expressed as an integer in the 222 range 10 to 50, corresponding to MOS x 10, as for MOS. A value of 223 127 indicates that this parameter is unavailable. Values other 224 than 127 and the valid range defined above MUST NOT be sent and 225 MUST be ignored by the receiving system. 227 5. SDP Signaling 229 One new parameter is defined for the report block defined in this 230 document to be used with Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] 231 using the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]. It has the 232 following syntax within the "rtcp-xr" attribute [RFC3611]: 234 rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=rtcp-xr:" 235 [xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF 236 xr-format = multimedia-quality-metrics 237 multimedia-quality-metrics = "multimedia-quality-metrics" 238 ["=" stat-flag *("," stat-flag)] 239 stat-flag = "Interval Metrics" 240 /"Cumulative metrics" 242 Refer to Section 5.1 of RFC 3611 [RFC3611] for a detailed description 243 and the full syntax of the "rtcp-xr" attribute. 245 6. IANA Considerations 247 New report block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. 248 For general guidelines on IANA allocations for RTCP XR, refer to 249 Section 6.2 of [RFC3611]. 251 This document assigns one new block type value in the RTCP XR Block 252 Type Registry: 254 Name: SMQM 255 Long Name: Synthetical Multimedia Quality Metric 256 Value 257 Reference: Section 4 259 This document also registers one new SDP [RFC4566] parameter for the 260 "rtcp-xr" attribute in the RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry: 262 * "multimedia-quality-metrics" 264 The contact information for the registrations is: 266 Qin Wu 267 sunseawq@huawei.com 268 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 269 Nanjing, JiangSu 210012 China 271 7. Security Considerations 273 The new RTCP XR report blocks proposed in this document introduces no 274 new security considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611]. 276 8. Acknowledgements 278 The authors would like to thank Bill Ver Steeg, David R Oran, Ali 279 Begen,Colin Perkins, Roni Even,Youqing Yang, Wenxiao Yu and Yinliang 280 Hu for their valuable comments and suggestions on this document. 282 9. References 284 9.1. Normative References 286 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 287 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 289 [RFC3611] Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control 290 Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", RFC 3611, 291 November 2003. 293 [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session 294 Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006. 296 [RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax 297 Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. 299 9.2. Informative References 301 [G.107] ITU-T, "The E Model, a computational model for use in 302 transmission planning", ITU-T Recommendation G.107, 303 April 2009. 305 [G.1082] ITU-T, "Measurement-based methods for improving the 306 robustness of IPTV performance", ITU-T 307 Recommendation G.1082, April 2009. 309 [MONARCH] Wu, Q., "Monitoring Architectures for RTP", 310 ID draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00, April 2011. 312 [P.564] ITU-T, "Conformance testing for narrowband Voice over IP 313 transmission quality assessment models", ITU-T 314 Recommendation P.564, July 2006. 316 [P.NAMS] ITU-T, "Non-intrusive parametric model for the Assessment 317 of performance of Multimedia Streaming", ITU-T 318 Recommendation P.NAMS, November 2009. 320 [P.NBAMS] ITU-T, "non-intrusive bit-stream model for assessment of 321 performance of multimedia streaming", ITU-T 322 Recommendation P.NBAMS, November 2009. 324 Appendix A. Change Log 326 A.1. draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03 328 The following are the major changes compared to previous version 02: 329 o Remove the tag field. 330 o Define MOS Value field as 32 bits integer value field. 331 o Clear unused references. 332 o Add text to MOS type field for clarification. 333 o Other Editorial changes. 335 Authors' Addresses 337 Qin Wu 338 Huawei 339 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 340 Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 341 China 343 Email: sunseawq@huawei.com 344 Glen Zorn 345 Network Zen 346 77/440 Soi Phoomjit, Rama IV Road 347 Phra Khanong, Khlong Toie 348 Bangkok 10110 349 Thailand 351 Phone: +66 (0) 87 502 4274 352 Email: gwz@net-zen.net 354 Roland Schott 355 Deutsche Telekom Laboratories 356 Deutsche-Telekom-Allee 7 357 Darmstadt 64295 358 Germany 360 Email: Roland.Schott@telekom.de 362 Kai Lee 363 China Telecom 364 China Telecom Beijing Research Institute 366 Email: leekai@ctbri.com.cn