Network Working Group C. Holmberg
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Updates: 5761 (if approved) September 21, 2016
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: March 25, 2017

Updates to RFC 5761
draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-03.txt

Abstract

This document updates RFC 5761 by clarifying the SDP offer/answer negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing. It makes it clear that an answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an SDP answer if the associated SDP offer contained the attribute.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on March 25, 2017.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2016 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.

This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English.


Table of Contents

1. Introduction

RFC 5761 [RFC5761] specifies how to multiplex RTP data packets and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets on a single UDP port, and how to negotiate usage of such multiplexing using the SDP offer/answer mechanism [RFC3264], using an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute. However, the text is unclear on whether an answerer is allowed to include the attribute in an answer even if the associated offer did not contain an attribute.

This document updates RFC 5761 [RFC5761] by clarifying that an answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an answer if the associated offer contained the attribute. It also clarifies that the negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing is for usage in both directions.

2. Conventions

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 [RFC2119].

3. Update to RFC 5761

This section updates section 5.1.1 of RFC 5761 by clarifying that an answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an answer if the associated offer contained the attribute, and by clarifying that the negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing is for usage in both directions.

3.1. Update to section 5.1.1

In this section references to Sections 4 and 8 are to sections in [RFC5761].


OLD TEXT:

 When the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [8] is used to negotiate
 RTP sessions following the offer/answer model [9], the "a=rtcp-mux"
 attribute (see Section 8) indicates the desire to multiplex RTP and
 RTCP onto a single port.  The initial SDP offer MUST include this
 attribute at the media level to request multiplexing of RTP and RTCP
 on a single port.  For example:

     v=0
     o=csp 1153134164 1153134164 IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
     s=-
     c=IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
     t=1153134164 1153137764
     m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 97
     a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
     a=rtcp-mux

 This offer denotes a unicast voice-over-IP session using the RTP/AVP
 profile with iLBC coding.  The answerer is requested to send both RTP
 and RTCP to port 49170 on IPv6 address 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e.

 If the answerer wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port,
 it MUST include a media-level "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer.
 The RTP payload types used in the answer MUST conform to the rules in
 Section 4.

 If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the offerer
 MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.  Instead,
 it should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated according to the
 usual port-selection rules (either the port pair, or a signalled port
 if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also included).  This will occur
 when talking to a peer that does not understand the "a=rtcp-mux"
 attribute.

 When SDP is used in a declarative manner, the presence of an "a=rtcp-
 mux" attribute signals that the sender will multiplex RTP and RTCP on
 the same port.  The receiver MUST be prepared to receive RTCP packets
 on the RTP port, and any resource reservation needs to be made
 including the RTCP bandwidth.


NEW TEXT:

 When the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [8] is used to negotiate
 RTP sessions following the offer/answer model [9], the "a=rtcp-mux"
 attribute (see Section 8) indicates the desire to multiplex RTP and
 RTCP onto a single port, and the usage is always negotiated for both
 directions.

 If the offerer wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port,
 the initial SDP offer MUST include the attribute at the media level to
 request multiplexing of RTP and RTCP on a single port. For example:

     v=0
     o=csp 1153134164 1153134164 IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
     s=-
     c=IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
     t=1153134164 1153137764
     m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 97
     a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
     a=rtcp-mux

 This offer denotes a unicast voice-over-IP session using the RTP/AVP
 profile with iLBC coding.  The answerer is requested to send both RTP
 and RTCP to port 49170 on IPv6 address 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e.

 If the offer contains the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, and if the answerer
 wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port, it MUST include a
 media-level "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer. The RTP payload
 types used in the answer MUST conform to the rules in Section 4. If
 the offer does not contain the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute the answerer
 MUST NOT include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer, and the
 answerer MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.

 If the answerer includes an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer, the
 offerer and answerer MUST multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single
 port.

 If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the offerer
 and answerer MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.
 Instead, they should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated
 according to the usual port-selection rules (either the port pair, or
 a signalled port if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also included).
 This will occur when talking to a peer that does not understand the
 "a=rtcp-mux" attribute.

 When SDP is used in a declarative manner, the presence of an "a=rtcp-
 mux" attribute signals that the sender will multiplex RTP and RTCP on
 the same port.  The receiver MUST be prepared to receive RTCP packets
 on the RTP port, and any resource reservation needs to be made
 including the RTCP bandwidth.

                

4. Security Considerations

The security considerations for RTP and RTCP multiplexing are described in RFC 5761. This specification does not impact those security considerations.

5. IANA Considerations

This specification makes no requests from IANA.

6. Acknowledgements

Thanks to Colin Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Kyzivat, Roni Even for providing comments on the document. Thomas Belling provided useful input in the discussions that took place in 3GPP and resulated in the submission of the document. Elwyn Davies performed the Gen-ART review.

7. Change Log

[RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing]

Change from -02

Change from -01

Change from -00

8. Normative References

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002.
[RFC5761] Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Multiplexing RTP Data and Control Packets on a Single Port", RFC 5761, DOI 10.17487/RFC5761, April 2010.

Author's Address

Christer Holmberg Ericsson Hirsalantie 11 Jorvas, 02420 Finland EMail: christer.holmberg@ericsson.com