RFC 1890 (rfc1890) - Page 1 of 18


RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control



Alternative Format: Original Text Document

Next >


Network Working Group                Audio-Video Transport Working Group
Request for Comments: 1890                                H. Schulzrinne
Category: Standards Track                                      GMD Fokus
                                                            January 1996


    RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

   This memo describes a profile for the use of the real-time transport
   protocol (RTP), version 2, and the associated control protocol, RTCP,
   within audio and video multiparticipant conferences with minimal
   control. It provides interpretations of generic fields within the RTP
   specification suitable for audio and video conferences.  In
   particular, this document defines a set of default mappings from
   payload type numbers to encodings.

   The document also describes how audio and video data may be carried
   within RTP. It defines a set of standard encodings and their names
   when used within RTP. However, the encoding definitions are
   independent of the particular transport mechanism used. The
   descriptions provide pointers to reference implementations and the
   detailed standards. This document is meant as an aid for implementors
   of audio, video and other real-time multimedia applications.

1.  Introduction

   This profile defines aspects of RTP left unspecified in the RTP
   Version 2 protocol definition (RFC 1889). This profile is intended
   for the use within audio and video conferences with minimal session
   control. In particular, no support for the negotiation of parameters
   or membership control is provided. The profile is expected to be
   useful in sessions where no negotiation or membership control are
   used (e.g., using the static payload types and the membership
   indications provided by RTCP), but this profile may also be useful in
   conjunction with a higher-level control protocol.






Schulzrinne                 Standards Track


Next >


Web Standards & Support:

Link to and support eLook.org Powered by LoadedWeb Web Hosting
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! eLook.org FireFox Extensions