draft-dt-rmcat-feedback-message-01.txt   draft-dt-rmcat-feedback-message-02.txt 
IETF RMCAT Working Group Z. Sarker IETF RMCAT Working Group Z. Sarker
Internet-Draft Ericsson AB Internet-Draft Ericsson AB
Intended status: Standards Track C. Perkins Intended status: Standards Track C. Perkins
Expires: May 1, 2017 University of Glasgow Expires: November 3, 2017 University of Glasgow
V. Singh V. Singh
callstats.io callstats.io
M. Ramalho M. Ramalho
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
October 28, 2016 May 02, 2017
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Feedback for Congestion Control RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Feedback for Congestion Control
draft-dt-rmcat-feedback-message-01 draft-dt-rmcat-feedback-message-02
Abstract Abstract
This document describes a feedback message intended to enable This document describes a feedback message intended to enable
congestion control for interactive real-time traffic. The RTP Media congestion control for interactive real-time traffic. The RTP Media
Congestion Avoidance Techniques (RMCAT) Working Group formed a design Congestion Avoidance Techniques (RMCAT) Working Group formed a design
team to analyze feedback requirements from various congestion control team to analyze feedback requirements from various congestion control
algorithms and to design a generic feedback message to help ensure algorithms and to design a generic feedback message to help ensure
interoperability across those algorithms. The feedback message is interoperability across those algorithms. The feedback message is
designed for a sender-based congestion control, which means the designed for a sender-based congestion control, which means the
skipping to change at page 1, line 43 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 1, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 3, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 3, line 14 skipping to change at page 3, line 14
(e.g., different rate adaptation algorithms), it is highly desirable (e.g., different rate adaptation algorithms), it is highly desirable
to have generic congestion control feedback format. to have generic congestion control feedback format.
To help achieve interoperability for unicast RTP congestion control, To help achieve interoperability for unicast RTP congestion control,
this memo proposes a common RTCP feedback format that can be used by this memo proposes a common RTCP feedback format that can be used by
NADA [I-D.ietf-rmcat-nada], SCReAM [I-D.ietf-rmcat-scream-cc], Google NADA [I-D.ietf-rmcat-nada], SCReAM [I-D.ietf-rmcat-scream-cc], Google
Congestion Control [I-D.ietf-rmcat-gcc] and Shared Bottleneck Congestion Control [I-D.ietf-rmcat-gcc] and Shared Bottleneck
Detection [I-D.ietf-rmcat-sbd], and hopefully future RTP congestion Detection [I-D.ietf-rmcat-sbd], and hopefully future RTP congestion
control algorithms as well. control algorithms as well.
[Editor's Note: consider removing this part of the section in the
later versions ] In preparing this memo, we have considered the
following:
o What are the feedback requirements for the proposed RTP congestion
control candidate solution?
o Can we design a feedback message that is future proof, and general
enough to meet the needs of algorithms that have yet to be
defined?
o Can we use existing RTCP Extended Report (XR) blocks and/or RTCP
Feedback Messages? If not, what is the rationale behind new XR
blocks and/or RTCP feedback messages?
o What will be the wire format of the generic feedback message?
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
In addition the terminology defined in [RFC3550], [RFC3551], In addition the terminology defined in [RFC3550], [RFC3551],
[RFC3611], [RFC4585], and [RFC5506] applies. [RFC3611], [RFC4585], and [RFC5506] applies.
3. Feedback Message 3. Feedback Message
skipping to change at page 9, line 39 skipping to change at page 9, line 39
There is a risk of causing congestion if an on-path attacker modifies There is a risk of causing congestion if an on-path attacker modifies
the feedback messages in such a manner to make available bandwidth the feedback messages in such a manner to make available bandwidth
greater than it is in reality. [More on security consideration TBD.] greater than it is in reality. [More on security consideration TBD.]
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback]
Perkins, C., "Using RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Feedback Perkins, C., "RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Feedback for
for Unicast Multimedia Congestion Control", draft-ietf- Congestion Control in Interactive Multimedia Conferences",
rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback-01 (work in progress), July 2016. draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback-03 (work in progress),
November 2016.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition [RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition
of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP",
RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001, RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3168>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3168>.
skipping to change at page 11, line 7 skipping to change at page 11, line 13
1.pdf>. 1.pdf>.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-gcc] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-gcc]
Holmer, S., Lundin, H., Carlucci, G., Cicco, L., and S. Holmer, S., Lundin, H., Carlucci, G., Cicco, L., and S.
Mascolo, "A Google Congestion Control Algorithm for Real- Mascolo, "A Google Congestion Control Algorithm for Real-
Time Communication", draft-ietf-rmcat-gcc-02 (work in Time Communication", draft-ietf-rmcat-gcc-02 (work in
progress), July 2016. progress), July 2016.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-nada] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-nada]
Zhu, X., Pan, R., Ramalho, M., Cruz, S., Jones, P., Fu, Zhu, X., Pan, R., Ramalho, M., Cruz, S., Jones, P., Fu,
J., D'Aronco, S., and C. Ganzhorn, "NADA: A Unified J., and S. D'Aronco, "NADA: A Unified Congestion Control
Congestion Control Scheme for Real-Time Media", draft- Scheme for Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-04
ietf-rmcat-nada-03 (work in progress), September 2016. (work in progress), March 2017.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-sbd] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-sbd]
Hayes, D., Ferlin, S., Welzl, M., and K. Hiorth, "Shared Hayes, D., Ferlin, S., Welzl, M., and K. Hiorth, "Shared
Bottleneck Detection for Coupled Congestion Control for Bottleneck Detection for Coupled Congestion Control for
RTP Media.", draft-ietf-rmcat-sbd-05 (work in progress), RTP Media.", draft-ietf-rmcat-sbd-06 (work in progress),
September 2016. February 2017.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-scream-cc] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-scream-cc]
Johansson, I. and Z. Sarker, "Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation Johansson, I. and Z. Sarker, "Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation
for Multimedia", draft-ietf-rmcat-scream-cc-06 (work in for Multimedia", draft-ietf-rmcat-scream-cc-07 (work in
progress), August 2016. progress), November 2016.
[RFC5104] Wenger, S., Chandra, U., Westerlund, M., and B. Burman, [RFC5104] Wenger, S., Chandra, U., Westerlund, M., and B. Burman,
"Codec Control Messages in the RTP Audio-Visual Profile "Codec Control Messages in the RTP Audio-Visual Profile
with Feedback (AVPF)", RFC 5104, DOI 10.17487/RFC5104, with Feedback (AVPF)", RFC 5104, DOI 10.17487/RFC5104,
February 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5104>. February 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5104>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Zaheduzzaman Sarker
Ericsson AB Ericsson AB
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
32 lines changed or deleted 16 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/