Tech-invite3GPPspaceIETF RFCsSIP
929190898887868584838281807978777675747372717069686766656463626160595857565554535251504948474645444342414039383736353433323130292827262524232221201918171615141312111009080706050403020100
in Index   Prev   Next

RFC 3047

RTP Payload Format for ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1

Pages: 8
Obsoleted by:  5577

ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 1
Network Working Group                                           P. Luthi
Request for Comments: 3047                                    PictureTel
Category: Standards Track                                   January 2001


          RTP Payload Format for ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1

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.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

International Telecommunication Union (ITU-T) Recommendation G.722.1 is a wide-band audio codec, which operates at one of two selectable bit rates, 24kbit/s or 32kbit/s. This document describes the payload format for including G.722.1 generated bit streams within an RTP packet. Also included here are the necessary details for the use of G.722.1 with MIME and SDP.

1. Conventions used in this document

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 RFC-2119 [6].

2. Overview of ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1

G.722.1 is a low complexity coder, it compresses 50Hz - 7kHz audio signals into one of two bit rates, 24 kbit/s or 32 kbit/s. The coder may be used for speech, music and other types of audio. Some of the applications for which this coder is suitable are: o Real-time communications such as videoconferencing and telephony. o Streaming audio o Archival and messaging
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 2
   A fixed frame size of 20 ms is used, and for any given bit rate the
   number of bits in a frame is a constant.

3. RTP payload format for G.722.1

G.722.1 uses 20 ms frames and a sampling rate clock of 16 kHz, so the RTP timestamp MUST be in units of 1/16000 of a second. The RTP payload for G.722.1 has the format shown in Figure 1. No additional header specific to this payload format is required. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | RTP Header [3] | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | | + one or more frames of G.722.1 | | .... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: RTP payload for G.722.1 The encoding and decoding algorithm can change the bit rate at any 20ms frame boundary, but no bit rate change notification is provided in-band with the bit stream. Therefore, a separate out-of-band method is REQUIRED to indicate the bit rate (see section 6 for an example of signaling bit rate information using SDP). For the payload format specified here, the bit rate MUST remain constant for a particular payload type value. An application MAY switch bit rates from packet to packet by defining two payload type values and switching between them. The assignment of an RTP payload type for this new packet format is outside the scope of this document, and will not be specified here. It is expected that the RTP profile for a particular class of applications will assign a payload type for this encoding, or if that is not done then a payload type in the dynamic range shall be chosen. The number of bits within a frame is fixed, and within this fixed frame G.722.1 uses variable length coding (e.g., Huffman coding) to represent most of the encoded parameters [2]. All variable length codes are transmitted in order from the left most (most significant - MSB) bit to the right most (least significant - LSB) bit, see [2] for more details. The use of Huffman coding means that it is not possible to identify the various encoded parameters/fields contained within the bit stream without first completely decoding the entire frame.
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 3
   For the purposes of packetizing the bit stream in RTP, it is only
   necessary to consider the sequence of bits as output by the G.722.1
   encoder, and present the same sequence to the decoder.  The payload
   format described here maintains this sequence.

   When operating at 24 kbit/s, 480 bits (60 octets) are produced per
   frame, and when operating at 32 kbit/s, 640 bits (80 octets) are
   produced per frame.  Thus, both bit rates allow for octet alignment
   without the need for padding bits.

   Figure 2 illustrates how the G.722.1 bit stream MUST be mapped into
   an octet aligned RTP payload.

   An RTP packet SHALL only contain G.722.1 frames of the same bit rate.

      first bit                                          last bit
      transmitted                                     transmitted
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                         |
      + sequence of bits (480 or 640) generated by the          |
      |            G.722.1 encoder for transmission             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


      |           |           |                     |           |
      |           |           |     ...             |           |
      |           |           |                     |           |


      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |MSB...  LSB|MSB...  LSB|                     |MSB...  LSB|
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        RTP         RTP                               RTP
        octet 1     octet 2                           octet
                                                      60 or 80

        Figure 2:  The G.722.1 encoder bit stream is split into
                   a sequence of octets (60 or 80 depending on
                   the bit rate), and each octet is in turn
                   mapped into an RTP octet.

   The ITU-T standardized bit rates for G.722.1 are 24 kbit/s and
   32kbit/s.  However, the coding algorithm itself has the capability to
   run at any user specified bit rate (not just 24 and 32kbit/s) while
   maintaining an audio bandwidth of 50 Hz to 7 kHz.  This rate change
   is accomplished by a linear scaling of the codec operation, resulting
   in frames with size in bits equal to 1/50 of the corresponding bit
   rate.
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 4
   When operating at non-standard rates the payload format MUST follow
   the guidelines illustrated in Figure 2.  It is RECOMMENDED that
   values in the range 16000 to 32000 be used, and that any value MUST
   be a multiple of 400 (this maintains octet alignment and does not
   then require (undefined) padding bits for each frame if not octet
   aligned).  For example, a bit rate of 16.4 kbit/s will result in a
   frame of size 328 bits or 41 octets which are mapped into RTP per
   Figure 2.

3.1 Multiple G.722.1 frames in a RTP packet

More than one G.722.1 frame may be included in a single RTP packet by a sender. Senders have the following additional restrictions: o SHOULD NOT include more G.722.1 frames in a single RTP packet than will fit in the MTU of the RTP transport protocol. o All frames contained in a single RTP packet MUST be of the same length, that is they MUST have the same bit rate (octets per frame). o Frames MUST NOT be split between RTP packets. It is RECOMMENDED that the number of frames contained within an RTP packet be consistent with the application. For example, in a telephony application where delay is important, then the fewer frames per packet the lower the delay, whereas for a delay insensitive streaming or messaging application, many frames per packet would be acceptable.

3.2 Computing the number of G.722.1 frames

Information describing the number of frames contained in an RTP packet is not transmitted as part of the RTP payload. The only way to determine the number of G.722.1 frames is to count the total number of octets within the RTP packet, and divide the octet count by the number of expected octets per frame (either 60 or 80 per frame, for 24 kbit/s and 32 kbit/s respectively).

4. MIME registration of G.722.1

MIME media type name: audio MIME subtype: G7221
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 5
   Required parameters:

         bitrate: the data rate for the audio bit stream.  This
         parameter is necessary because the bit rate is not signaled
         within the G.722.1 bit stream.  At the standard G.722.1 bit
         rates, the value MUST be either 24000 or 32000.  If using the
         non-standard bit rates, then it is RECOMMENDED that values in
         the range 16000 to 32000 be used, and that any value MUST be a
         multiple of 400 (this maintains octet alignment and does not
         then require (undefined) padding bits for each frame if not
         octet aligned).

   Optional parameters:

         ptime: RECOMMENDED duration of each packet in milliseconds.

   Encoding considerations:
         This type is only defined for transfer via RTP as specified in
         a Work in Progress.

   Security Considerations:
         See Section 6 of RFC 3047.

   Interoperability considerations: none

   Published specification:
         See ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1 [2] for encoding algorithm
         details.

   Applications which use this media type:
         Audio and video streaming and conferencing tools

   Additional information: none

   Person & email address to contact for further information:
         Patrick Luthi
         Luthip@pictel.com

   Intended usage: COMMON

   Author/Change controller:
         Author: Patrick Luthi
         Change controller: IETF AVT Working Group
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 6

5. SDP usage of G.722.1

When conveying information by SDP [5], the encoding name SHALL be "G7221" (the same as the MIME subtype). An example of the media representation in SDP for describing G.722.1 at 24000 bits/sec might be: m=audio 49000 RTP/AVP 121 a=rtpmap:121 G7221/16000 a=fmtp:121 bitrate=24000 where "bitrate" is a variable that may take on values of 24000 or 32000 at the standard rates, or values from 16000 to 32000 (and MUST be an integer multiple of 400) at the non-standard rates.

6. Security Considerations

RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP specification [3], and any appropriate RTP profile. This implies that confidentiality of the media streams is achieved by encryption. Because the data compression used with this payload format is applied end-to-end, encryption may be performed after compression so there is no conflict between the two operations. A potential denial-of-service threat exists for data encodings using compression techniques that have non-uniform receiver-end computational load. The attacker can inject pathological datagrams into the stream which are complex to decode and cause the receiver to be overloaded. However, this encoding does not exhibit any significant non-uniformity. As with any IP-based protocol, in some circumstances a receiver may be overloaded simply by the receipt of too many packets, either desired or undesired. Network-layer authentication may be used to discard packets from undesired sources, but the processing cost of the authentication itself may be too high. In a multicast environment, pruning of specific sources may be implemented in future versions of IGMP [7] and in multicast routing protocols to allow a receiver to select which sources are allowed to reach it.
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 7

7. References

1. Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 2. ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1, available online from the ITU bookstore at http://www.itu.int. 3. Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R. and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for real-time applications", RFC 1889, January 1996. (Updated by a Work in Progress.) 4. Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, November 1996. 5. Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998. 6. Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 7. Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", STD 5, RFC 1112, August 1989.

8. Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank Tony Crossman for starting this work on G.722.1 packetization and for authoring the initial draft. The author also wishes to thank Steve Casner and Colin Perkins for their valuable feedback and helpful comments.

9. Author's Address

Patrick Luthi PictureTel Corporation 100 Minuteman Road Andover, MA 01810 USA Phone: +1 (978) 292 4354 EMail: luthip@pictel.com
ToP   noToC   RFC3047 - Page 8

10. Full Copyright Statement

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.