Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)

Ott, Joerg; Carrara, Elisabetta

doi:10.17487/rfc4585

Cited by 132 publications

(261 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

260

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…o T_rr_interval is the minimal interval between RTCP reports, as defined in Section 3.4 of [RFC4585]; it is only meaningful for implementations of RTP/AVPF profile [RFC4585] or the RTP/SAVPF profile [RFC5124].…”

Section: Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rationale for this choice of timeout is as described in Section 6.2 of [RFC3550] ("so that implementations which do not use the reduced value for transmitting RTCP packets are not timed out by other participants prematurely") and has been updated by Section 6.1.4 of [RFC8108] to account for the use of the RTP/AVPF profile [RFC4585] or the RTP/SAVPF profile [RFC5124].…”

Section: Rtp/avp Circuit Breaker #1: Rtcp Timeoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multimedia Congestion Control: Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions

Perkins¹,

Singh²

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is widely used in telephony, video conferencing, and telepresence applications. Such applications are often run on best-effort UDP/IP networks. If congestion control is not implemented in these applications, then network congestion can lead to uncontrolled packet loss and a resulting deterioration of the user's multimedia experience. The congestion control algorithm acts as a safety measure by stopping RTP flows from using excessive resources and protecting the network from overload. At the time of this writing, however, while there are several proprietary solutions, there is no standard algorithm for congestion control of interactive RTP flows.This document does not propose a congestion control algorithm. It instead defines a minimal set of RTP circuit breakers: conditions under which an RTP sender needs to stop transmitting media data to protect the network from excessive congestion. It is expected that, in the absence of long-lived excessive congestion, RTP applications running on best-effort IP networks will be able to operate without triggering these circuit breakers. To avoid triggering the RTP circuit breaker, any Standards Track congestion control algorithms defined for RTP will need to operate within the envelope set by these RTP circuit breaker algorithms.

show abstract

Section: Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rtp/avp Circuit Breaker #1: Rtcp Timeoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multimedia Congestion Control: Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions

Perkins¹,

Singh²

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[More specific rules only need to be included if some parameter does not match these RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP specification [RFC3550] , and in any applicable RTP profile such as RTP/AVP [RFC3551], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], RTP/SAVP [RFC3711], or RTP/ SAVPF [RFC5124]. However, as "Securing the RTP Protocol Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media Security Solution" [RFC7202] discusses, it is not an RTP payload format's responsibility to discuss or mandate what solutions are used to meet the basic security goals like confidentiality, integrity, and source authenticity for RTP in general.…”

Section: A112 Mapping To Sdpmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Write an RTP Payload Format

Westerlund¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…TFRC requires frequent feedback, which RTCP does not provide even when considering the extended RTP profile for RTCP-based feedback (RFC 4585 [5]). Mo argued that application-specified weighted fairness is important but while MulTFRC provides better performance than TFRC, it is not clear whether the added complexity over an n-times-TFRC approach is indeed worth the effort.…”

Section: Simulations and Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Report from the IAB/IRTF Workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication

Tschofenig¹,

Eggert²,

Sarker³

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document provides a summary of the IAB/IRTF Workshop on 'Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication', which took place in Vancouver, Canada, on July 28, 2012. The main goal of the workshop was to foster a discussion on congestion control mechanisms for interactive real-time communication. This report summarizes the discussions and lists recommendations to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) community.

show abstract

Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)

Cited by 132 publications

References 14 publications

Multimedia Congestion Control: Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions

Multimedia Congestion Control: Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions

How to Write an RTP Payload Format

Report from the IAB/IRTF Workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About