Subject: RE: [AVT] Draft AVT agenda

From: ROUX Catherine FTRD/DMI/REN <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:28:22 +0100

First I send you a summary of my presentation with open issues.
I send you my slides after.

Thanks to organise the meeting .

Yours sincerely

Cath Roux

TP payload formats for MPEG4
draft-curet-avt-rtp-mpeg4-flexmux-02.txt

Summary

This draft presents the payload format for flexMuxtiplexed files.
It allows to transmit several Elementary Stream in one RTP Channel, to
give and keep a strong synchronism  between the streams which are
multiplexed.

The general  RTP header is kept, but  we have to precise the use OF The
following fields  :
        -The RTP timeStamp is the value of the FCR if it exists or the
emission time
of the RTP packet.
        -The bit M is managed by the upper levels(coder or SL) and indicates
the end of
one or all the Aus which are in this RTP payload.

The payload is compouned of one or several inchanged Flexmux packets.
This payload allows also to transmit the in-band signalling; thus the
flexmux can be dynamically change. This signalling is given in the same
channel as the FCR.
When the signalling is not transmitted IN BAND, we propose a SDP syntax to
transmit it in the out-of-band signalling Channel. So we have added a new
media-type & subType : "application mpeg4-flexmux"
and a new type parameter for the "a" attribute line  "mpeg4-flexmuxinfo"
which can be transmitted in different formS : binary XML or URL 

example
m = application 4444 RTP/AVP  96
a = rtpmap:96 mpeg4-flexmux/1000
a = mpeg4-flexmuxinfo:"http://example.com/FlexMuxdescriptor.dat"

OPEN issues:
We want to discuss the conformity of the proposal when the signalling
is transmitted out of the band (SDP syntax )

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Colin Perkins [mailto:[email-masked]]
Envoye : lundi 3 decembre 2001 07:29
A : [email-masked]
Objet : [AVT] Draft AVT agenda

Folks,

Enclosed is the draft agenda for the AVT working group meeting at the Salt
Lake City IETF. Please send comments and corrections to the working group
chairs, by Tuesday 4th December.

Those who have agenda time scheduled are requested to prepare a summary of
the issues they wish to discuss, and to send this to the mailing list ahead
of the meeting. This gives folks that won't be attending the opportunity to 
post their comments and concerns, and potentially even reach some consensus,

before the meeting time is consumed. It also gives other participants the 
opportunity to consider the issue in more depth. Summary messages should be 
sent to the mailing list by Tuesday 4th December.

We also request that all presenters send us their slides ahead of time. This

has multiple purposes:

  - It streamlines the presentation process by having the presentations on 
    a single laptop.

  - It avoids the delay that sometimes occurs in getting the presentations
    sent to us after the meeting, for inclusion in the minutes.

  - It allows us to preview the presentations to see if they are following 
    the guidelines for what should be covered during the meeting.

Those presenting new drafts: briefly describe the basic problem and your
proposed solution, discuss known issues, limitations and problems, outline
where you want input from the working group, and how you wish us to proceed.
When presenting work which has been previously discussed: describe only the
changes from the previous draft, highlight unresolved problems, and propose
future directions. Presenters are reminded of the requirements for
disclosure 
of intellectual property relating to contributions, in section 10 of RFC
2026. 

Agenda time is conditional on sending both a summary of open issues and a
copy of your slides ahead of the meeting.

We strongly encourage all participants to read all relevent drafts before 
the meeting, and to comment on the open issues raised on the mailing list. 

Thanks for your assistance to try to conduct an effective meeting.

Colin & Steve

============================================================================
===
Audio/Video Transport WG (AVT)

Monday, December 10 at 1930-2200
Wednesday, December 12 at 0900-1130
===================================

CHAIRS: Steve Casner <[email-masked]>
        Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>

AGENDA:

Session 1:

- Introduction and status (Casner/Perkins)				10
	Published or with RFC editor:
		RFC 3158
		draft-ietf-avt-dv-audio-04.txt
		draft-ietf-avt-dv-video-04.txt
	Under revision after IESG review:
		draft-ietf-avt-rtp-amr-10.txt
	Last call:
		draft-ietf-avt-crtp-enhance-03.txt
		draft-ietf-avt-tcrtp-04.txt
		draft-ietf-avt-uxp-01.txt
		draft-ietf-avt-ulp-02.txt 
		draft-ietf-avt-rtp-cn-04.txt

- RTP Payload formats for MPEG-4
	draft-ietf-avt-mpeg4-multiSL-02.txt 		(Gentric)	10
	draft-ietf-avt-mpeg4-simple-00.txt		(van der Meer)	10
	draft-curet-avt-rtp-mpeg4-flexmux-01.txt 	(Roux)		10

- RTP payload format for GSM EFR speech			(Barany)	15
	draft-barany-avt-efr-00.txt
	draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-12.txt section 4.5.9

- RTP Payload Format for EVRC, SMV and Frame-Based Vocoders (Li)	15
	draft-li-avt-vocoder-00.txt 

- RTP Payload Format for AC-3 Streams 			(Flaks)		15
	draft-flaks-avt-rtp-ac3-00.txt

- MWPP: A resilient MIDI RTP packetization 		(Lazzaro)	15
	draft-lazzaro-avt-mwpp-midi-nmp-00.txt

- RTP Payload Format for Distributed Speech Recognition	(Xie)		15
	draft-ietf-avt-dsr-00.txt

Session 2: 

- RTP payload format for JPEG 2000 video streams 	(Edwards)	15
	draft-edwards-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-00.txt

- Update to RTP specification and profile		(Casner)	15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-new-11.txt, .ps
	draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-12.txt, .ps
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-mime-06.txt 
	draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-bw-05.txt

- Secure RTP profile					(Carrara)	15
	draft-ietf-avt-srtp-02.txt

- RTP extensions for classification and priority
	draft-carlberg-rtp-classifier-extension-00.txt	(Carlberg)	 5
	draft-polk-avt-rtpext-res-pri-00.txt		(Polk)		 5
	Discussion							10

- Extended RTP Profile for RTCP-based Feedback		(Ott)		15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-feedback-01.txt
	draft-burmeister-avt-rtcp-feedback-sim-00.txt

- RTP retransmission
	draft-leon-retransmission-01.txt		(Leon)		15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-selret-03.txt

- RTCP Extension for SSM Sessions with Unicast feedback (Chesterfield)	15
	draft-chesterfield-avt-rtcpssm-02.txt

- Extending RTCP for call quality metrics		(Massad)	 5

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

---

From: "Edwards, Eric" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:12:29 -0800

Greetings,

I will be presenting in the Wednesday AM session on - 

- RTP payload format for JPEG 2000 video streams        
        draft-edwards-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-00.txt

Abstract - 

This document describes a payload format for transporting JPEG 2000 video
streams using RTP (Real-time Transport Protocol).      JPEG 2000 video
streams are formed as a continuous series of JPEG 2000 still images which is
next-generation still image coding.  The JPEG 2000 payload format described
in this document has three features: (1) Improvement of robustness to packet
loss by fragmenting JPEG 2000 packet units intelligently, (2) Persistency of
main header to minimize loss effect, (3) Priority information field for
scalable delivery from the same codestream.  These will allow the
scalability and robustness of JPEG 2000 to be maximized in streaming
applications.

JPEG 2000 was designed as a compression standard that would perform
efficiently in client-server and networked environments.  JPEG 2000 is an
embedded coding technology which allows scalability without redundancy.  In
JPEG 2000 part 3, the Motion JPEG 2000 file format has been defined but not
the transmission format for streaming on the Internet.  Although JPEG 2000
has very powerful features that make it very useful in networked
environments, there is still work that needs to be done in transport and on
a multimedia framework to fully leverage these powerful features.
Therefore, we have investigated RTP for JPEG 2000 video streams where the
JPEG 2000 features can be leveraged in an intelligent way for streaming
applications.  The result is the Internet-Draft -
draft-edwards-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-00.txt.

JPEG 2000 was developed in ISO/IEC SC 29 WG 1 (JPEG).  The experts in JPEG
recognize the need for work in this area.  An AHG has been formed in WG 1 to
investigate this proposal and to provide input to the work on this proposal
in IETF.

Open Issues
We ask interested experts in the AVT WG to review this Internet-Draft and
provide feedback.

We have identified a few areas for investigation and discussion - 

1)  Is there another variation packet fragmentation that may have benefits?
       - ex.) Just distinction between main header & the other packets
             Pro: more error tolerant than Type 0 fragmentation
	       Con: additional fragmentation rule

2)  How to use type-specific field
       - Reserved for future use. Usage with the tiling number is one idea.
       - Or to use with the priority field instead of a more complex
priority 
         mapping table.

3)  Other option header
       - Basically reserved for future use. Our proposal to convey QCD/QCC
is one example.
       - Is there other important data field in header?

4)  Priority numbering scheme  
       - This is implementation matter and 0xff vs. 0, 0xff priority value
in non-priority mapping 
         table mode.

5)  Priority mapping table
       - "informative" reference should be shown

Any comments prior to the meeting would be appreciated.

Best regards,

Eric Edwards
Eisaburo Itakura 
Sony