| Rfc | 6332 |
|---|
| Title | Multicast Acquisition Report Block Type for RTP Control Protocol
(RTCP) Extended Reports (XRs) |
|---|
| Author | A. Begen, E. Friedrich |
|---|
| Date | July 2011 |
|---|
| Format: | TXT, HTML |
|---|
| Status: | PROPOSED STANDARD |
|---|
|
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) A. Begen
Request for Comments: 6332 E. Friedrich
Category: Standards Track Cisco
ISSN: 2070-1721 July 2011
Multicast Acquisition Report Block Type for
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Reports (XRs)
Abstract
In most RTP-based multicast applications, the RTP source sends inter-
related data. Due to this interdependency, randomly joining RTP
receivers usually cannot start consuming the multicast data right
after they join the session. Thus, they often experience a random
acquisition delay. An RTP receiver can use one or more different
approaches to achieve rapid acquisition. Yet, due to various
factors, performance of the rapid acquisition methods usually varies.
Furthermore, in some cases, the RTP receiver can do a simple
multicast join (in other cases, it is compelled to do so). For
quality reporting, monitoring, and diagnostic purposes, it is
important to collect detailed information from the RTP receivers
about their acquisition and presentation experiences. This document
addresses this issue by defining a new report block type, called the
Multicast Acquisition (MA) report block, within the framework of RTP
Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Reports (XRs) (RFC 3611). This
document also defines the necessary signaling of the new MA report
block type in the Session Description Protocol (SDP).
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/rfc6332.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Multicast Acquisition (MA) Report Block . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Base Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.1. Status Code Rules for New MA Methods . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.2. Status Code Rules for the RAMS Method . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.1. Vendor-Neutral Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2.2. Private Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Session Description Protocol Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.1. RTCP XR Block Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. RTCP XR SDP Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.3. Multicast Acquisition Method Registry . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.4. Multicast Acquisition Report Block TLV Space Registry . . 12
7.5. Multicast Acquisition Status Code Space Registry . . . . . 13
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction
The RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) is the out-of-band control protocol
for applications that use the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) for
media transport [RFC3550]. In addition to providing minimal control
functionality to RTP entities, RTCP also enables a basic-level
monitoring of RTP sessions via sender and receiver reports. More
statistically detailed monitoring as well as application-specific
monitoring are usually achieved through the RTCP Extended Reports
(XRs) [RFC3611].
In most RTP-based multicast applications such as the ones carrying
video content, the RTP source sends inter-related data.
Consequently, the RTP application may not be able to decode and
present the data in an RTP packet before decoding the data in one or
more earlier RTP packets and/or before acquiring some Reference
Information about the content itself. Thus, RTP receivers that are
randomly joining a multicast session often experience a random
acquisition delay. In order to reduce this delay, [RFC6285] proposes
an approach where an auxiliary unicast RTP session is established
between a retransmission server and the joining RTP receiver. Over
this unicast RTP session, the retransmission server provides the
Reference Information, which is all the information the RTP receiver
needs to rapidly acquire the multicast stream. This method is
referred to as the Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP Sessions
(RAMS). However, depending on the variability in the Source
Filtering Group Management Protocol (SFGMP) processing times, the
availability of network resources for rapid acquisition, and the
nature of the RTP data, not all RTP receivers can acquire the
multicast stream in the same amount of time. The performance of
rapid acquisition may vary not only for different RTP receivers but
also over time.
To increase the visibility of the multicast service provider in its
network, to diagnose slow multicast acquisition issues, and to
collect the acquisition experiences of the RTP receivers, this
document defines a new report block type, which is called the
Multicast Acquisition (MA) report block, within the framework of RTCP
XR. RTP receivers that use the method described in [RFC6285] may use
this report every time they join a new multicast RTP session. RTP
receivers that use a different method for rapid acquisition or those
that do not use any method but rather do a simple multicast join may
also use this report. This way, the multicast service provider can
quantitatively compare the improvements achieved by different
methods.
2. Requirements Notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119].
3. Definitions
This document uses the acronyms and definitions from Section 3 of
[RFC6285].
4. Multicast Acquisition (MA) Report Block
This section defines the format of the MA report block. The base
report is payload independent. An extension mechanism is provided
where further optional payload-independent and payload-specific
information can be included in the report as desired.
The OPTIONAL extensions that are defined in this document are
primarily developed for the method presented in [RFC6285]. Other
methods that provide rapid acquisition can define their own
extensions to be used in the MA report block.
The packet format for the RTCP XR is defined in Section 2 of
[RFC3611]. Each XR packet has a fixed-length field for version,
padding, reserved bits, payload type (PT), length, synchronization
source (SSRC) of packet sender as well as a variable-length field for
report blocks. In the XR packets, the PT field is set to XR (207).
It is better to send the MA report block after all the necessary
information is collected and computed. Partial reporting is
generally not useful as it cannot give the full picture of the
multicast acquisition, and it causes additional complexity in terms
of report block matching and correlation. The MA report block is
only sent as a part of an RTCP compound packet, and it is sent in the
primary multicast session.
The need for reliability of the MA report block is not any greater
than other report blocks or types. If desired, the report block
could be repeated for redundancy purposes while respecting the RTCP
scheduling algorithms.
Following the rules specified in [RFC3550], all integer fields in the
base report and extensions defined below are carried in network-byte
order, that is, most significant byte (octet) first, also known as
big-endian. Unless otherwise stated, numeric constants are in
decimal (base 10).
4.1. Base Report
The base report format is shown in Figure 1.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BT=11 | MA Method | Block Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of the Primary Multicast Stream |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Status | Rsvd. |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Base Report Format for the MA Report Block
o BT (8 bits): Field that denotes the type for this block format.
The MA report block is identified by the constant 11.
o MA Method (8 bits): Field that denotes the type of the MA method
(e.g., simple join, RAMS, etc.). See Section 7.3 for the values
registered with IANA.
o Block Length (16 bits): The length of this report block, including
the header, in 32-bit words minus one.
o SSRC of the Primary Multicast Stream (32 bits): Field that denotes
the SSRC of the primary multicast stream.
o Status (16 bits): Field that denotes the status code for the MA
operation.
This document defines several status codes and registers them with
IANA in Section 7.5. If a new vendor-neutral status code will be
defined, it MUST be registered with IANA according to the
guidelines specified in Section 7.5. If the new status code is
intended to be used privately by a vendor, there is no need for
IANA management. Section 4.2.2 defines how a vendor defines and
uses private extensions to convey its messages.
To indicate use of a private extension, the RTP receiver MUST set
the Status field to zero. A private extension MUST NOT be used in
an XR unless the RTP receiver knows from out-of-band methods that
the entity that will receive and process the XR understands the
private extension.
o Rsvd. (16 bits): The RTP receiver MUST set this field to zero.
The recipient MUST ignore this field when received.
If the multicast join was successful, meaning that at least one
multicast packet was received, some additional information MUST be
appended to the base report as described in Section 4.2.1.
4.1.1. Status Code Rules for New MA Methods
Different MA methods usually use different status codes, although
some status codes (e.g., a code indicating that multicast join has
failed) can be common among multiple MA methods. The status code
reported in the base report MUST always be within the scope of the
particular MA method specified in the MA Method field.
In certain MA methods, the RTP receiver can generate a status code
for its multicast acquisition attempt or can be told by another
network element or RTP endpoint what the current status is via a
response code. In such cases, the RTP receiver MAY report the value
of the received response code as its status code if the response code
has a higher priority. Each MA method needs to outline the rules
pertaining to its response and status codes so that RTP receiver
implementations can determine what to report in any given scenario.
4.1.2. Status Code Rules for the RAMS Method
In this section, we provide the status code rules for the RAMS method
described in [RFC6285].
Section 11.6 of [RFC6285] defines several response codes. The 1xx-
and 2xx-level response codes are informational and success response
codes, respectively. If the RTP receiver receives a 1xx- or 2xx-
level response code, then the RTP receiver MUST use one of the 1xxx-
level status codes defined in Section 7.5 of this document. If the
RTP receiver receives a 4xx- or 5xx-level response code (indicating
receiver-side and server-side errors, respectively), then the RTP
receiver MUST use the response code as its status code. In other
words, the 4xx- and 5xx-level response codes have a higher priority
than the 1xxx-level status codes.
4.2. Extensions
To improve the reporting scope, it might be desirable to define new
fields in the MA report block. Such fields are to be encoded as TLV
elements as described below and sketched in Figure 2:
o Type: A single-octet identifier that defines the type of the
parameter represented in this TLV element.
o Length: A two-octet field that indicates the length (in octets) of
the TLV element excluding the Type and Length fields and the 8-bit
Reserved field between them. Note that this length does not
include any padding that is needed for alignment.
o Value: Variable-size set of octets that contains the specific
value for the parameter.
In the extensions, the Reserved field MUST be set to zero and ignored
on reception. If a TLV element does not fall on a 32-bit boundary,
the last word MUST be padded to the boundary using further bits set
to zero.
In the MA report block, the RTP receiver MUST place any vendor-
neutral or private extension after the base report.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: Value :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Structure of a TLV Element
4.2.1. Vendor-Neutral Extensions
If the goal in defining new TLV elements is to extend the report
block in a vendor-neutral manner, they need to be registered with
IANA according to the guidelines provided in Section 7.4.
This document defines several vendor-neutral extensions. First, we
present the TLV elements that can be used by any RTP-based multicast
application.
o RTP Seqnum of the First Multicast Packet (16 bits): TLV element
that specifies the RTP sequence number of the first multicast
packet received for the primary multicast stream. If the
multicast join was successful, this element MUST be included. If
no multicast packet has been received, this element MUST NOT exist
in the report block.
Type: 1
o SFGMP Join Time (32 bits): TLV element that denotes the greater of
zero or the time difference (in ms) between the instant the SFGMP
Join message was sent and the instant the first packet was
received in the multicast session. If the multicast join was
successful, this element MUST be included. If no multicast packet
has been received, this element MUST NOT exist in the report
block.
Type: 2
o Application Request-to-Multicast Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL
TLV element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the application became aware it would join a new multicast
session and the instant the first RTP packet was received from the
primary multicast stream. If no such packet has been received,
this element MUST NOT exist in the report block.
Type: 3
o Application Request-to-Presentation Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL
TLV element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the application became aware it would join a new multicast
session and the instant the media was first presented. If the RTP
receiver cannot successfully present the media, this element MUST
NOT exist in the report block.
Type: 4
We next present the TLV elements that can be used when the RTP
receiver supports and uses the RAMS method described in [RFC6285].
However, if the RTP receiver does not send a rapid acquisition
request, the following TLV elements MUST NOT exist in the MA report
block. Some elements may or may not exist depending on whether or
not the RTP receiver receives any packet from the unicast burst
and/or the primary multicast stream. These are explained below.
o Application Request-to-RAMS Request Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL
TLV element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the application became aware it would request a rapid
acquisition and the instant the rapid acquisition request was
actually sent by the application.
Type: 11
o RAMS Request-to-RAMS Information Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL
TLV element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the rapid acquisition request was sent and the instant the
first RAMS Information message was received in the unicast
session. If no such message has been received, this element MUST
NOT exist in the report block.
Type: 12
o RAMS Request-to-Burst Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL TLV element
that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the instant the
rapid acquisition request was sent and the instant the first burst
packet was received in the unicast session. If no burst packet
has been received, this element MUST NOT exist in the report
block.
Type: 13
o RAMS Request-to-Multicast Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL TLV
element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the rapid acquisition request was sent and the instant the
first RTP packet was received from the primary multicast stream.
If no such packet has been received, this element MUST NOT exist
in the report block.
Type: 14
o RAMS Request-to-Burst-Completion Delta Time (32 bits): OPTIONAL
TLV element that denotes the time difference (in ms) between the
instant the rapid acquisition request was sent and the instant the
last burst packet was received in the unicast session. If no
burst packet has been received, this element MUST NOT exist in the
report block.
Type: 15
o Number of Duplicate Packets (32 bits): OPTIONAL TLV element that
denotes the number of duplicate packets due to receiving the same
packet in both unicast and primary multicast RTP sessions. If no
RTP packet has been received from the primary multicast stream,
this element MUST NOT exist. If no burst packet has been received
in the unicast session, the value of this element MUST be set to
zero.
Type: 16
o Size of Burst-to-Multicast Gap (32 bits): OPTIONAL TLV element
that denotes the greater of zero or the difference between the
sequence number of the first multicast packet (received from the
primary multicast stream) and the sequence number of the last
burst packet minus 1 (considering the wrapping of the sequence
numbers). If no burst packet has been received in the unicast
session or no RTP packet has been received from the primary
multicast stream, this element MUST NOT exist in the report block.
Type: 17
4.2.2. Private Extensions
It is desirable to allow vendors to use private extensions in TLV
format. The range of [128-254] of TLV Types is reserved for private
extensions. IANA management for these extensions is unnecessary;
they are the responsibility of individual vendors.
Implementations use the structure depicted in Figure 3 for private
extensions. Here, the private enterprise numbers are used from
http://www.iana.org. This will ensure the uniqueness of the private
extensions and avoid any collision.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Enterprise Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: Value :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Structure of a Private Extension
5. Session Description Protocol Signaling
A new unilateral parameter is defined for the MA report block to be
used with the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566]. In the
following ABNF [RFC5234], xr-format is used as defined in [RFC3611].
xr-format =/ multicast-acq-ext
multicast-acq-ext = "multicast-acq"
Refer to Section 5.1 of [RFC3611] for a detailed description and the
full syntax of the 'rtcp-xr' attribute.
6. Security Considerations
The security considerations of [RFC3611] apply in this document as
well.
The information contained in MA reports could be stolen as with any
other RTCP reports if proper protection mechanism(s) are not in
place. If desired, similar to other RTCP XRs, the MA reports MAY be
protected by using Secure RTP (SRTP) and Secure RTP Control Protocol
(SRTCP) [RFC3711].
Malicious sniffing or otherwise obtaining MA report blocks can reveal
performance characteristics of the RTP service and underlying
network. This information is mostly available to an observer with
the ability to capture RTP and RTCP session traffic. The contents
and value of any private extension need to be studied when
considering the necessity to secure the MA reports since application-
level performance data might be present that is not otherwise
available to an attacker, as with the required fields and vendor-
neutral extensions.
Using the MA reports to provide feedback into the acquisition of the
multicast streams can introduce possible additional security
implications. If a forged or otherwise modified MA report is
received for an earlier acquisition attempt, invalid data can be used
as input in later rapid acquisition attempts. For example,
incorrectly small SFGMP join times could cause the unicast burst to
be too short, leading to gaps in sequence numbers in the approach
discussed in [RFC6285]. Additionally, forged reports could give the
appearance that rapid acquisition is performing correctly when it is
in fact failing, or vice versa. While integrity protection can be
achieved in different ways, we RECOMMEND the use of SRTCP [RFC3711].
7. IANA Considerations
The following contact information is provided for all registrations
in this document:
Ali Begen
abegen@cisco.com
7.1. RTCP XR Block Type
Type value 11 has been registered with IANA for the "Multicast
Acquisition Report Block" in the RTCP XR Block Type Registry.
7.2. RTCP XR SDP Parameter
The SDP [RFC4566] parameter 'multicast-acq' for the 'rtcp-xr'
attribute has been registered in the RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry.
7.3. Multicast Acquisition Method Registry
A new IANA registry for the MA methods has been created. The
registry is called the "Multicast Acquisition Method Registry". This
registry is to be managed by IANA according to the Specification
Required policy of [RFC5226].
The length of the MA Method field is a single octet, allowing 256
values. The registry is initialized with the following entries:
MA Method Description Reference
--------- ------------------------------------ -------------
0 Reserved [RFC6332]
1 Simple join (No explicit method) [RFC6332]
2 RAMS [RFC6285]
3-254 Unassigned Specification Required
255 Reserved [RFC6332]
The MA Method values 0 and 255 are reserved for future use.
Any registration for an unassigned value needs to contain the
following information:
o Contact information of the one doing the registration, including
at least name, address, and email.
o A detailed description of how the MA method works.
7.4. Multicast Acquisition Report Block TLV Space Registry
A new IANA TLV space registry for the MA report block extensions has
been created. The registry is called the "Multicast Acquisition
Report Block TLV Space Registry". This registry is to be managed by
the IANA according to the Specification Required policy of [RFC5226].
The length of the Type field in the TLV elements is a single octet,
allowing 256 values. The registry is initialized with the following
entries:
Type Description Reference
------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved [RFC6332]
1 RTP Seqnum of the First Multicast Packet [RFC6332]
2 SFGMP Join Time [RFC6332]
3 Application Request-to-Multicast Delta Time [RFC6332]
4 Application Request-to-Presentation Delta Time [RFC6332]
5-10 Unassigned Specification Required
11 Application Request-to-RAMS Request Delta Time [RFC6332]
12 RAMS Request-to-RAMS Information Delta Time [RFC6332]
13 RAMS Request-to-Burst Delta Time [RFC6332]
14 RAMS Request-to-Multicast Delta Time [RFC6332]
15 RAMS Request-to-Burst-Completion Delta Time [RFC6332]
16 Number of Duplicate Packets [RFC6332]
17 Size of Burst-to-Multicast Gap [RFC6332]
18-127 Unassigned Specification Required
128-254 Reserved for private extensions [RFC6332]
255 Reserved [RFC6332]
The Type values 0 and 255 are reserved for future use. The Type
values between (and including) 128 and 254 are reserved for private
extensions.
Any registration for an unassigned Type value needs to contain the
following information:
o Contact information of the one doing the registration, including
at least name, address, and email.
o A detailed description of what the new TLV element represents and
how it is interpreted.
7.5. Multicast Acquisition Status Code Space Registry
A new IANA TLV space registry for the status codes has been created.
The registry is called the "Multicast Acquisition Status Code Space
Registry". This registry is to be managed by the IANA according to
the Specification Required policy of [RFC5226].
The length of the Status field is two octets, allowing 65536 codes.
However, the status codes have been registered to allow for an easier
classification. For example, the values between (and including) 1
and 1000 are primarily used by the MA method of simple join. The
values between (and including) 1001 and 2000 are used by the MA
method described in [RFC6285]. When registering new status codes for
the existing MA methods or newly defined MA methods, registrants are
encouraged to allocate sufficient continuous space. Note that
because of the limited space, not every MA method can be assigned
1000 different values for its status codes.
The status code 65535 is reserved for future use. The registry is
initialized with the following entries:
Code Description Reference
--------- ------------------------------------------------ ---------
0 A private status code is included in the message [RFC6332]
1 Multicast join was successful [RFC6332]
2 Multicast join has failed [RFC6332]
3 A presentation error has occurred [RFC6332]
4 An unspecified RTP receiver internal error has
occurred [RFC6332]
5-1000 Unassigned
1001 RAMS has been successfully completed [RFC6332]
1002 No RAMS-R message has been sent [RFC6332]
1003 Invalid RAMS-I message syntax [RFC6332]
1004 RAMS-I message has timed out [RFC6332]
1005 RAMS unicast burst has timed out [RFC6332]
1006 An unspecified RTP receiver internal error has
occurred during RAMS [RFC6332]
1007 A presentation error has occurred during RAMS [RFC6332]
1008-65534 Unassigned
65535 Reserved [RFC6332]
Any registration for an unassigned status code needs to contain the
following information:
o Contact information of the one doing the registration, including
at least name, address, and email.
o A detailed description of what the new status code describes and
how it is interpreted.
8. Acknowledgments
This specification has greatly benefited from discussions with
Michael Lague, Dong Hsu, Carol Iturralde, Xuan Zhong, Dave Oran, Tom
Van Caenegem, and many others. The authors would like to thank each
of these individuals for their contributions.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.
[RFC3611] Friedman, T., Caceres, R., and A. Clark, "RTP Control
Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)", RFC 3611,
November 2003.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, March 2004.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.
[RFC6285] Ver Steeg, B., Begen, A., Van Caenegem, T., and Z. Vax,
"Unicast-Based Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP
Sessions", RFC 6285, June 2011.
9.2. Informative References
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Ali Begen
Cisco
181 Bay Street
Toronto, ON M5J 2T3
Canada
EMail: abegen@cisco.com
Eric Friedrich
Cisco
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, MA 01719
USA
EMail: efriedri@cisco.com