Network Working Group C. Perkins Request for Comments: 4421 University of Glasgow Updates: 4175 February 2006 Category: Standards Track RTP Payload Format for Uncompressed Video: Additional Colour Sampling Modes 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 (2006).
AbstractThe RFC Payload Format for Uncompressed Video, RFC 4175, defines a scheme to packetise uncompressed, studio-quality, video streams for transport using RTP. This memo extends the format to support additional colour sampling modes. 1] defines a scheme to packetise uncompressed, studio-quality, video streams for transport using RTP . A range of standard and high-definition video formats is supported, and parameters are defined so sender and receiver can negotiate the image size, colour space, pixel depth, and colour sampling mode. A limitation of the signalling is that the number of bits per sample is assumed to be the same for each colour component. For example, it is possible to signal video using RGB colour sampling with 8 bits for each of the Red, Green, and Blue components (24 bits per pixel), but not video using RGB colour sampling with 5 bits each for the Red and Blue components, but 6 bits for the Green component (16 bits per pixel). Such video formats can easily be transported by the payload format, but cannot be signalled using the parameters defined. This memo extends  with additional colour sampling modes, to signal such video formats.
RFC 2119 . 1]. The new modes are "RGB+", "RG+B", "R+GB", "BGR+", "BG+R", and "B+GR". These sampling modes use the same packing order of samples as do the RGB and BGR colour sampling modes, respectively (Section 4.3 of ), except that an additional bit per sample of colour depth MUST be used for the component marked by the + symbol. The mandatory parameter "depth=N" indicates that N bits per sample are used by the unmarked components, but N+1 bits are used by the marked component. All other features of the payload format are as defined in . The primary use of these colour sampling modes is to enable efficient packing of data into small pixel groups ("pgroups"). The most common use case is expected to be video with "depth=5", where the additional bit of colour depth for the marked component enables a single pixel to fit into two octets without padding. The new colour sampling modes MAY be used for other depths, however, should that prove useful.
1] apply. No additional security considerations are introduced by support for new colour sampling modes. Section 6.2 of . The new values are "RGB+", "RG+B", "R+GB", "BGR+", "BG+R", and "B+GR" as described in this memo.  Gharai, L. and C. Perkins, "RTP Payload Format for Uncompressed Video", RFC 4175, September 2005.  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at email@example.com. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA).