One document matched: draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-06.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='http://xml.resource.org/authoring/rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc2250 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2250.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3611 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3611.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3357 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3357.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3550 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3550.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc4566 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4566.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5216 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5216.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5234 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5234.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5296 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5296.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5247 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5247.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-pmol-metrics-framework PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-pmol-metrics-framework.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.hunt-avt-monarch PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hunt-avt-monarch.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-svc PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-svc.xml">
]>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="yes" ?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-06"
ipr="trust200902">
<front>
<title abbrev="RTCP XR QoE Report Blocks">RTCP XR Blocks for QoE metric
reporting</title>
<author fullname="Geoff Hunt" initials="G." surname="Hunt">
<organization>Unaffiliated</organization>
<address>
<email>r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Alan Clark" initials="A." surname="Clark">
<organization abbrev="Telchemy">Telchemy Incorporated</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>2905 Premiere Parkway, Suite 280</street>
<city>Duluth</city>
<region>GA</region>
<code>30097</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>alan.d.clark@telchemy.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
<organization>Huawei</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>
<city>Nanjing</city>
<region>Jiangsu</region>
<code>210012</code>
<country>China</country>
</postal>
<email>sunseawq@huawei.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Roland Schott" initials="R." surname="Schott">
<organization abbrev="DT">Deutsche Telekom Laboratories</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Deutsche-Telekom-Allee 7</street>
<street></street>
<city>Darmstadt</city>
<code>64295</code>
<country>Germany</country>
</postal>
<email>Roland.Schott@telekom.de</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Glen Zorn" initials="G." surname="Zorn">
<organization>Network Zen</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>77/440 Soi Phoomjit, Rama IV Road</street>
<street>Phra Khanong, Khlong Toie</street>
<city>Bangkok</city>
<code>10110</code>
<country>Thailand</country>
</postal>
<phone>+66 (0) 87 502 4274</phone>
<email>gwz@net-zen.net</email>
</address>
</author>
<date year="2011" />
<abstract>
<t>This document defines an RTCP XR Report Block and associated SDP
parameters that allow the reporting of QoE metrics for use in a range of
RTP applications.</t>
</abstract>
</front>
<middle>
<section title="Introduction">
<section title="QoE Metrics Report Block">
<t>This draft defines a new block type to augment those defined in
<xref target="RFC3611"></xref>, for use in a range of RTP
applications. <vspace blankLines="1" />The new block type provides
information on multimedia quality using one of several standard
metrics.<vspace blankLines="1" />The metrics belong to the class of
application level metrics defined in <xref target="MONARCH"></xref>
(work in progress).</t>
</section>
<section title="RTCP and RTCP XR Reports">
<t>The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in <xref
target="RFC3550"></xref>. <xref target="RFC3611"></xref> defined an
extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended Report (XR).
This draft defines a new Extended Report block that MUST be used as
defined in RFC3550 and RFC3611.</t>
</section>
<section title="Performance Metrics Framework">
<t>The Performance Metrics Framework <xref target="PMOL"></xref>
provides guidance on the definition and specification of performance
metrics. Metrics described in this draft either reference external
definitions or define metrics generally in accordance with the
guidelines in <xref target="PMOL"></xref>.</t>
</section>
<section title="Applicability">
<t>The QoE Metrics Report Block can be used in any application of RTP
for which QoE measurement algorithms are defined.</t>
<t>The factors that affect real-time AV application quality can be
split into two categories. The first category consists of transport-
dependent factors such as packet loss, delay and jitter (which also
translates into losses in the playback buffer). The factors in the
second category are application-specific factors that affect real time
application (e.g., video) quality and are sensitivity to network
errors. These factors can be but not limited to video codec and loss
recovery technique, coding bit rate, packetization scheme, and content
characteristics.</t>
<t>Compared with application-specific factors, the transport-dependent
factors sometimes are not sufficient to measure real time data
quality, since the ability to analyze the real time data in the
application layer provides quantifiable measurements for subscriber
Quality of Experience (QoE) that may not be captured in the
transmission layers or from the RTP layer down. In a typical scenario,
monitoring of the transmission layers can produce statistics
suggesting that quality is not an issue, such as the fact that network
jitter is not excessive. However, problems may occur in the service
layers leading to poor subscriber QoE. Therefore monitoring using only
network-level measurements may be insufficient when application layer
content quality is required.</t>
<t>In order to provide accurate measures of real time application
quality when transporting real time contents across a network, the
synthentical multimedia quality Metrics is highly required which can
be conveyed in the RTCP XR packets[RFC3611] and may have the following
three benefits: <vspace blankLines="1" /><list style="symbols">
<t>Tuning the content encoder algorithm to satisfy real time data
quality requirements.</t>
<t>Determining which system techniques to use in a given situation
and when to switch from one technique to another as system
parameters change.</t>
<t>Verifying the continued correct operation of an existing
system.</t>
</list></t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Terminology">
<section title="Standards Language">
<t>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 <xref
target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.</t>
<t>The terminology used is <vspace blankLines="1" /><list>
<t>Numeric formats S X:Y<vspace blankLines="1" /><list>
<t>where S indicates a two's complement signed representation,
X the number of bits prior to the decimal place and Y the
number of bits after the decimal place.</t>
<t>Hence 8:8 represents an unsigned number in the range 0.0 to
255.996 with a granularity of 0.0039. S7:8 would represent the
range -127.996 to +127.996. 0:16 represents a proper binary
fraction with range</t>
<t>0.0 to 1 - 1/65536 = 0.9999847</t>
<t>though note that use of flag values at the top of the
numeric range slightly reduces this upper limit. For example,
if the 16- bit values 0xfffe and 0xffff are used as flags for
"over-range" and "unavailable" conditions, a 0:16 quantity has
range</t>
<t>0.0 to 1 - 3/65536 = 0.9999542</t>
</list></t>
</list></t>
</section>
</section>
<section anchor="SMQM" title="QoE Metrics Block">
<t>This block reports the multimedia application performance or quality
beyond the information carried in the standard RTCP packet format.
Information is recorded about multimedia application QoE metric which
provides a measure that is indicative of the user's view of a service.
Multimedia application QoE metric is commonly expressed as a MOS ("Mean
Opinion Score"), MOS is on a scale from 1 to 5, in which 5 represents
excellent and 1 represents unacceptable. MOS scores are usually obtained
using subjective testing or using objective algorithm. However
Subjective testing to estimate the multimedia quality may be not
suitable for measuring the multimedia quality since the results may vary
from test to test. Therefore using objective algorithm to calculate MOS
scores is recommended. ITU-T recommendations define the methodologies
for assessment of the performance of multimedia stream <xref
target="G.107"></xref><xref target="P.564"></xref><xref
target="G.1082"></xref><xref target="P.NAMS"></xref><xref
target="P.NBAMS"></xref> and provides a method to evaluate QoE
estimation algorithms and objective model for video and audio. Hence
this document recommends vendors and implementers to use these
International Telecommunication Union (ITU)-specified methodologies to
measure parameters when possible. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<section title="Metric Block Structure">
<t>The report block contents are dependent upon a series of flag bits
carried in the first part of the header. Not all parameters need to be
reported in each block. Flags indicate which are and which are not
reported. The fields corresponding to unreported parameters MUST be
present, but are set to zero. The receiver MUST ignore any QoE Metrics
Block with a non-zero value in any field flagged as unreported. The
encoding of QoE metrics block payload consists of a series of 32 bit
units called segments that describe MOS Type, MoS algorithm and MoS
value.</t>
<t>The QoE Metrics Block has the following format: <figure>
<artwork>
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=TBD | I | Rsd | block length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SSRC of source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
..................
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
</artwork>
</figure></t>
</section>
<section title="Definition of Fields in QoE Metrics Block">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Block type (BT): 8 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />The
QoE Metrics Block is identified by the constant <SMQ>.
<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bit "><vspace
blankLines="1" />This field is used to indicate whether the Basic
Loss/Discard metrics are Interval or Cumulative metrics, that is,
whether the reported values applies to the most recent measurement
interval duration between successive metrics reports (I=01) (the
Interval Duration) or to the accumulation period characteristic of
cumulative measurements (I=00) (the Cumulative Duration) or to the
value of a continuously measured or calculated that has been
sampled at end of the interval (I=10) (Sampled Value). <vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Rsd.:6 bits "><vspace blankLines="1" /> This field is
reserved for future definition. In the absence of such a
definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and MUST be
ignored by the receiver. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Block Length: 16 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />The
length of this report block in 32-bit words, minus one. For the
QoE Metrics Block, the block length is variable length.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="SSRC of source: 32 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" /> As
defined in Section 4.1 of <xref target="RFC3611"></xref>. <vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Segment i: 32 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />There
are three segment types : single stream, multi-channel audio,
multi-layer. Multi-channel segment and multi-layer segment are
used to deal with the case where multiple elementary streams or
components are carried in one RTP stream while single stream
segment is used to deal with the case where there is no more than
one elementary streams or components in one RTP stream. The left
two bits of the section determine its type. If the leftmost bit of
the segment is zero, then it is single stream segment. If the
leftmost bit is one and the second bit is zero, then it is
multi-channel audio segment, if the leftmost bit is one and the
second bit is one, then it is multi- view segment. Note that in
these three segment type,any two segment types can not be present
in the same metric block. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
<section title="single stream segment">
<figure>
<artwork>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| MT |CAlg | Rsv. | MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
</artwork>
</figure>
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Segment Type ( S): 1 bit"><vspace
blankLines="1" />A zero identifies this as a single stream
segment. Single stream means there is only one elementary stream
carried in one RTP stream. The single stream segment can be used
to report the MoS value associated with this elementary stream.
If there are multiple streams and they want to use the single
stream segment to report the MOS value, they should be carried
in the separate RTP streams with different SSRC. In this case,
multiple QoE Metrics Blocks are required to report the MOS value
corresponding to each stream using single stream segment.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MoS Type (MT): 4 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" />This field is used to indicate the MOS type to
be reported. The MOS type is defined as follows: <vspace
blankLines="1" /><list>
<t>0000 MOS-LQ - Listening Quality MoS.</t>
<t>0001 MOS-CQ - Conversation Quality MoS.</t>
<t>0010 MOS-V - Video Quality MOS.</t>
<t>0011 MOS-AV - Audio-Video Quality MOS.</t>
<t>0100~1111 - Reserved for future definitions.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
</list>MoS-LQ measures the quality of audio for listening
purposes only while MoS-CQ measures the quality of audio for
conversation purpose only. MoS-V and MoS-AV measures the quality
of video application or Audio-Video application.Both MoS-LQ and
MoS-CQ are commonly used in VoIP applications. MOS-LQ uses
either wideband audio codec or narrowband audio codec, or both
and does not take into account any of bidirectional effects,
such as delay and echo. MOS-CQ uses narrowband codec and takes
into account listening quality in each direction, as well as the
bidirectional effects. If MoS type is MoS-LQ and MoS-CQ, the MoS
value can be calculated based on ITU-T G.107<xref
target="G.107"></xref>, ITU-T P.564 <xref
target="P.564"></xref>or ETSI TS 101 329-5 <xref
target="ETSI"></xref>, if the Mos type is MoS-V or MoS-AV, the
Mos value can be calculated based on ITU-T P.NAMS <xref
target="P.NAMS"></xref>or ITU-T P.NBAMS <xref
target="P.NBAMS"></xref>. If new MOS types are defined, they can
be added by an update to this document. If the receiver does not
understand the MOS type defined in this document it should
discard this report. If MoS Type does not match the MoS
algorithm in the report (e.g., specify a voice MOS algorithm for
a video quality MOS), the receiver should also discard this
report.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" /><list>
<t>000 - ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)</t>
<t>001 - G.107 [G.107] (Voice)</t>
<t>010 - G.107 / ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [G.107],[ ETSI]
(Voice)</t>
<t>011 - ITU-T P.NAMS [P.NAMS]</t>
<t>100 - ITU-T P.NBAMS [P.NBAMS]</t>
<t>101~111 - Reserved for future extension.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
<t hangText="Rsd.:8 bits "><vspace blankLines="1" /> This field
is reserved for future definition. In the absence of such a
definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and MUST
be ignored by the receiver. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MOS Value: 16 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />The
estimated mean opinion score for multimedia application quality
is defined as including the effects of delay,loss,
discard,jitter and other effects that would affect multimedia
quality . It is expressed in numeric format 8:8 with the value
in the range 0.0 to 255.996. The valid the measured value ranges
from 0.0 to 50.0, corresponding to MoS x 10 as for MoS. If the
measured value is over ranged, the value 0xFFFE SHOULD be
reported to indicate an over-range measurement. If the
measurement is unavailable, the value 0xFFFF SHOULD be reported.
Values other than 0xFFFE,0xFFFF and the valid range defined
above MUST NOT be sent and MUST be ignored by the receiving
system. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="multi-layer segment">
<figure>
<artwork>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1|1| MT |CAlg | SSID |Rsv| MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
</artwork>
</figure>
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Segment Type ( S): 1 bit"><vspace
blankLines="1" />A one identifies this as either a multi-channel
segment or multi-layer segment.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Media Type (M): 1bit"><vspace blankLines="1" />A
one identifies this as a multi-layer video segment.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MoS Type (MT): 4 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />As
defined in Section 4.2.1 of this document.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" />As defined in Section 4.2.1 of this
document.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Sub Stream Identifier (SSID): 5 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" />If multiple layers of video are carried in the
same RTP stream, each layer will be viewed as a sub stream.
Specially, If multiple views of video are carried in the same
RTP stream, each view will be viewed as a sub stream. This field
is used to identify each layer of video that is carried in the
same media stream. NAL unit type is one example of such SSID.
<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Rsd.:2 bits "><vspace blankLines="1" /> This field
is reserved for future definition. In the absence of such a
definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and MUST
be ignored by the receiver. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MOS Value: 16 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />As
defined in Section 4.2.1 of this document.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="multi-channel segment">
<figure>
<artwork>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1|0| MT |CAlg | CHID | Rsv.| MOS Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
</artwork>
</figure>
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Segement Type ( S): 1 bit"><vspace
blankLines="1" />A one identifies this as either a multi-channel
section or multi-view segment.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Media Type (M): 1bit"><vspace blankLines="1" />A
zero identifies this as a multi-channel audio section.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MoS Type (MT): 4 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />As
defined in Section 4.2.1 of this document.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Calculation Algorithm (CALg):3 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" />As defined in Section 4.2.1 of this
document.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Channel Identifier (CHID): 4 bits"><vspace
blankLines="1" />This field is used to identify each channel
that is carried in the same media stream. If multiple channels
of audio are carried in one RTP stream, each channel of audio
will be viewed as a independent channel(e.g., left channel
audio, right channel audio). Channel mapping follows static
ordering rule described in the section 4.1 of RFC3551. <vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="Rsd.:3 bits "><vspace blankLines="1" /> This field
is reserved for future definition. In the absence of such a
definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and MUST
be ignored by the receiver. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t hangText="MOS Value: 16 bits"><vspace blankLines="1" />As
defined in Section 4.2.1 of this document.<vspace
blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
</section>
</section>
</section>
<section title="SDP Signaling">
<t>One new parameter is defined for the report block defined in this
document to be used with Session Description Protocol (SDP) <xref
target="RFC4566"></xref> using the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)
<xref target="RFC5234"></xref>. It has the following syntax within the
"rtcp-xr" attribute <xref target="RFC3611"></xref>: <figure align="left">
<artwork>
rtcp-xr-attrib = "a=rtcp-xr:"
[xr-format *(SP xr-format)] CRLF
xr-format = qoe-metrics
qoe-metrics = "multimedia-quality-metrics"
</artwork>
</figure> Refer to Section 5.1 of <xref target="RFC3611">RFC
3611</xref> for a detailed description and the full syntax of the
"rtcp-xr" attribute.</t>
</section>
<section title="IANA Considerations">
<t>New block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration. For
general guidelines on IANA considerations for RTCP XR, refer to <xref
target="RFC3611"></xref>.</t>
<section title="New RTCP XR Block Type value">
<t>This document assigns the block type value NDEL in the IANA "RTCP
XR Block Type Registry" to the "QoE Metrics Block".</t>
<t>[Note to RFC Editor: please replace SMQ with the IANA provided RTCP
XR block type for this block.]</t>
</section>
<section title="New RTCP XR SDP Parameter">
<t>This document also registers a new parameter "qoe-metrics" in the
"RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry".</t>
</section>
<section title="Contact information for registrations">
<t>The contact information for the registrations is: <figure
align="center">
<artwork>
Qin Wu
sunseawq@huawei.com
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, JiangSu 210012 China
</artwork>
</figure></t>
</section>
<section title="New registry of calculation algorithms">
<t>This document creates a new registry to be called "RTCP XR QoE
metric block - Calculation Algorithm" as a sub-registry of the "RTP
Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR) Block Type Registry".
Policies for this new registry are as follows: <vspace
blankLines="1" /><list style="symbols">
<t>Entries in the registry are integers. The valid range is 0 to 7
corresponding to the 3-bit field "CAlg" in the block. Values are
to be recorded in decimal. <vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
<t>Initial assignments are as follows:<vspace
blankLines="1" /><list style="numbers">
<t>ITU-T P.564 Compliant Algorithm [P.564] (Voice)</t>
<t>G.107 [G.107] (Voice)</t>
<t>G.107 / ETSI TS 101 329-5 Annex E [G.107],[ ETSI]
(Voice)</t>
<t>ITU-T P.NAMS [P.NAMS]</t>
<t>ITU-T P.NBAMS [P.NBAMS]<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>
</list></t>
</list></t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Security Considerations">
<t>The new RTCP XR report blocks proposed in this document introduces no
new security considerations beyond those described in <xref
target="RFC3611"></xref>.</t>
</section>
<section title="Authors">
<t>This draft merges ideas from two different drafts addressing the QoE
metric Reporting issue. The authors of these drafts are listed below (in
alphabetical order) : <list>
<t>Alan Clark < alan.d.clark@telchemy.com ></t>
<t>Geoff Hunt < r.geoff.hunt@gmail.com ></t>
<t>Martin Kastner < martin.kastner@telchemy.com ></t>
<t>Kai Lee < leekai@ctbri.com.cn ></t>
<t>Roland Schott < roland.schott@telekom.de ></t>
<t>Qin Wu < sunseawq@huawei.com ></t>
<t>Glen Zorn < gwz@net-zen.net ></t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="Acknowledgements">
<t>The authors would like to thank Alan Clark, Bill Ver Steeg, David R
Oran, Ali Begen,Colin Perkins, Roni Even,Youqing Yang, Wenxiao Yu and
Yinliang Hu for their valuable comments and suggestions on this
document.</t>
</section>
</middle>
<back>
<references title="Normative References">
&rfc3611;
<reference anchor="RFC3550">
<front>
<title>RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications</title>
<author fullname="Henning Schulzrinne" initials="H."
surname="Schulzrinne">
<organization>Columbia University</organization>
</author>
<date month="July" year="2003" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3550" />
<format type="TXT" />
</reference>
&rfc2119;
&rfc4566;
&rfc5234;
</references>
<references title="Informative References">
<reference anchor="G.1082">
<front>
<title>Measurement-based methods for improving the robustness of
IPTV performance</title>
<author>
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="April" year="2009" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="G.1082" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="P.564">
<front>
<title>Conformance testing for narrowband Voice over IP transmission
quality assessment models</title>
<author>
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="July" year="2006" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="P.564" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="G.107">
<front>
<title>The E Model, a computational model for use in transmission
planning</title>
<author>
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="April" year="2009" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="G.107" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="ETSI">
<front>
<title>Quality of Service (QoS) measurement methodologies</title>
<author>
<organization>ETSI</organization>
</author>
<date month="November" year="2000" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ETSI" value="TS 101 329-5 V1.1.1" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="P.NAMS">
<front>
<title>Non-intrusive parametric model for the Assessment of
performance of Multimedia Streaming</title>
<author>
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="November" year="2009" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="P.NAMS" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="P.NBAMS">
<front>
<title>non-intrusive bit-stream model for assessment of performance
of multimedia streaming</title>
<author>
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="November" year="2009" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="P.NBAMS" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="MONARCH">
<front>
<title>Monitoring Architectures for RTP</title>
<author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
<organization>Huawei</organization>
</author>
<date month="April" year="2011" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ID" value="draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-00" />
<format type="TXT" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="PMOL">
<front>
<title>Framework for Performance Metric Development</title>
<author fullname="Alan Clark" initials="A." surname="Clark">
<organization></organization>
</author>
<author fullname="Benoit Claise " initials="B." surname="Claise">
<organization></organization>
</author>
<date month="July" year="2011" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ID" value="draft-ietf-pmol-metrics-framework-12" />
</reference>
</references>
<section title="Change Log">
<section title="draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03">
<t>The following are the major changes compared to previous version
02: <list style="symbols">
<t>Remove the tag field.</t>
<t>Define MOS Value field as 32 bits integer value field.</t>
<t>Clear unused references.</t>
<t>Add text to MOS type field for clarification.</t>
<t>Other Editorial changes.</t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-04">
<t>The following are the major changes compared to previous version
03: <list style="symbols">
<t>Add Numeric format definition and express the MoS-Value in
Numeric format.</t>
<t>Change 32bits MoS Value into 16bits MoS Value.</t>
<t>Add some text to MoS Type definition to clarify the algorithm
calculation.</t>
<t>Separate MoS-A into MoS-LQ and MoS-CQ and add some text to
clarify the difference between them.</t>
<t>Add one more reference for MoS-LQ and MoS-CQ value
calculation.</t>
<t>Other Editorial changes.</t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-05">
<t>The following are the major changes compared to previous version
04: <list style="symbols">
<t>Merge this draft with Clack's draft</t>
<t>Define three segment types to distinguish multiple elementary
stream carried in the same RTP stream from multiple elementary
stream carried in each different RTP stream</t>
<t>Allocate 3 bit for MOS calculation algorithms in each
segment.</t>
<t>Allocate or move 4 bit for MOS Type to each segment</t>
<t>Other Editorial changes.</t>
</list></t>
</section>
<section title="draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-06">
<t>The following are the major changes compared to previous version
05: <list style="symbols">
<t>Specify how sub-streams are identified.</t>
<t>Change multi-view segment into multi-layer segment.</t>
<t>Move Mos Type field before Calg field.</t>
<t>Provide guidance on how new calculation algorithms can be
registered</t>
<t>Define the channel mapping algorithm for multi-channel
segment</t>
</list></t>
</section>
</section>
</back>
</rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 02:01:02 |