File: rfc6190.html

package info (click to toggle)
doc-rfc 20230121-1
links: PTS, VCS
area: non-free
in suites: bookworm, forky, sid, trixie
size: 1,609,944 kB
file content (5597 lines) | stat: -rw-r--r-- 296,905 bytes
parent folder | download | duplicates (2)
<pre>Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         S. Wenger
Request for Comments: 6190                                   Independent
Category: Standards Track                                     Y.-K. Wang
ISSN: 2070-1721                                      Huawei Technologies
                                                              T. Schierl
                                                          Fraunhofer HHI
                                                        A. Eleftheriadis
                                                                   Vidyo
                                                                May 2011


              <span class="h1">RTP Payload Format for Scalable Video Coding</span>

Abstract

   This memo describes an RTP payload format for Scalable Video Coding
   (SVC) as defined in Annex G of ITU-T Recommendation H.264, which is
   technically identical to Amendment 3 of ISO/IEC International
   Standard 14496-10.  The RTP payload format allows for packetization
   of one or more Network Abstraction Layer (NAL) units in each RTP
   packet payload, as well as fragmentation of a NAL unit in multiple
   RTP packets.  Furthermore, it supports transmission of an SVC stream
   over a single as well as multiple RTP sessions.  The payload format
   defines a new media subtype name "H264-SVC", but is still backward
   compatible to <a href="./rfc6184">RFC 6184</a> since the base layer, when encapsulated in its
   own RTP stream, must use the H.264 media subtype name ("H264") and
   the packetization method specified in <a href="./rfc6184">RFC 6184</a>.  The payload format
   has wide applicability in videoconferencing, Internet video
   streaming, and high-bitrate entertainment-quality video, among
   others.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in <a href="./rfc5741#section-2">Section&nbsp;2 of RFC 5741</a>.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6190">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6190</a>.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) 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.

























<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


Table of Contents

   <a href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction ....................................................<a href="#page-5">5</a>
      <a href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>. The SVC Codec ..............................................<a href="#page-6">6</a>
           <a href="#section-1.1.1">1.1.1</a>. Overview ............................................<a href="#page-6">6</a>
           <a href="#section-1.1.2">1.1.2</a>. Parameter Sets ......................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
           <a href="#section-1.1.3">1.1.3</a>. NAL Unit Header .....................................<a href="#page-9">9</a>
      <a href="#section-1.2">1.2</a>. Overview of the Payload Format ............................<a href="#page-12">12</a>
           <a href="#section-1.2.1">1.2.1</a>. Design Principles ..................................<a href="#page-12">12</a>
           <a href="#section-1.2.2">1.2.2</a>. Transmission Modes and Packetization Modes .........<a href="#page-13">13</a>
           <a href="#section-1.2.3">1.2.3</a>. New Payload Structures .............................<a href="#page-15">15</a>
   <a href="#section-2">2</a>. Conventions ....................................................<a href="#page-16">16</a>
   <a href="#section-3">3</a>. Definitions and Abbreviations ..................................<a href="#page-16">16</a>
      <a href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>. Definitions ...............................................<a href="#page-16">16</a>
           <a href="#section-3.1.1">3.1.1</a>. Definitions from the SVC Specification .............<a href="#page-16">16</a>
           <a href="#section-3.1.2">3.1.2</a>. Definitions Specific to This Memo ..................<a href="#page-18">18</a>
      <a href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>. Abbreviations .............................................<a href="#page-22">22</a>
   <a href="#section-4">4</a>. RTP Payload Format .............................................<a href="#page-23">23</a>
      <a href="#section-4.1">4.1</a>. RTP Header Usage ..........................................<a href="#page-23">23</a>
      <a href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>. NAL Unit Extension and Header Usage .......................<a href="#page-23">23</a>
           <a href="#section-4.2.1">4.2.1</a>. NAL Unit Extension .................................<a href="#page-23">23</a>
           <a href="#section-4.2.2">4.2.2</a>. NAL Unit Header Usage ..............................<a href="#page-24">24</a>
      <a href="#section-4.3">4.3</a>. Payload Structures ........................................<a href="#page-25">25</a>
      <a href="#section-4.4">4.4</a>. Transmission Modes ........................................<a href="#page-28">28</a>
      <a href="#section-4.5">4.5</a>. Packetization Modes .......................................<a href="#page-28">28</a>
           4.5.1. Packetization Modes for Single-Session
                  Transmission .......................................<a href="#page-28">28</a>
           4.5.2. Packetization Modes for Multi-Session
                  Transmission .......................................<a href="#page-29">29</a>
      <a href="#section-4.6">4.6</a>. Single NAL Unit Packets ...................................<a href="#page-32">32</a>
      <a href="#section-4.7">4.7</a>. Aggregation Packets .......................................<a href="#page-33">33</a>
           4.7.1. Non-Interleaved Multi-Time Aggregation
                  Packets (NI-MTAPs) .................................<a href="#page-33">33</a>
      <a href="#section-4.8">4.8</a>. Fragmentation Units (FUs) .................................<a href="#page-35">35</a>
      <a href="#section-4.9">4.9</a>. Payload Content Scalability Information (PACSI) NAL Unit ..35
      <a href="#section-4.10">4.10</a>. Empty NAL unit ...........................................<a href="#page-43">43</a>
      <a href="#section-4.11">4.11</a>. Decoding Order Number (DON) ..............................<a href="#page-43">43</a>
           4.11.1. Cross-Session DON (CS-DON) for
                   Multi-Session Transmission ........................<a href="#page-43">43</a>
   <a href="#section-5">5</a>. Packetization Rules ............................................<a href="#page-45">45</a>
      <a href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>. Packetization Rules for Single-Session Transmission .......<a href="#page-45">45</a>
      <a href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>. Packetization Rules for Multi-Session Transmission ........<a href="#page-46">46</a>
           <a href="#section-5.2.1">5.2.1</a>. NI-T/NI-TC Packetization Rules .....................<a href="#page-47">47</a>
           <a href="#section-5.2.2">5.2.2</a>. NI-C/NI-TC Packetization Rules .....................<a href="#page-49">49</a>
           <a href="#section-5.2.3">5.2.3</a>. I-C Packetization Rules ............................<a href="#page-50">50</a>
           <a href="#section-5.2.4">5.2.4</a>. Packetization Rules for Non-VCL NAL Units ..........<a href="#page-50">50</a>
           <a href="#section-5.2.5">5.2.5</a>. Packetization Rules for Prefix NAL Units ...........<a href="#page-51">51</a>




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   <a href="#section-6">6</a>. De-Packetization Process .......................................<a href="#page-51">51</a>
      <a href="#section-6.1">6.1</a>. De-Packetization Process for Single-Session Transmission ..51
      <a href="#section-6.2">6.2</a>. De-Packetization Process for Multi-Session Transmission ...<a href="#page-51">51</a>
           6.2.1. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-T and
                  NI-TC Modes ........................................<a href="#page-52">52</a>
                  6.2.1.1. Informative Algorithm for NI-T
                           Decoding Order Recovery within
                           an Access Unit ............................<a href="#page-55">55</a>
           6.2.2. Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-C,
                  NI-TC, and I-C Modes ...............................<a href="#page-57">57</a>
   <a href="#section-7">7</a>. Payload Format Parameters ......................................<a href="#page-59">59</a>
      <a href="#section-7.1">7.1</a>. Media Type Registration ...................................<a href="#page-60">60</a>
      <a href="#section-7.2">7.2</a>. SDP Parameters ............................................<a href="#page-75">75</a>
           <a href="#section-7.2.1">7.2.1</a>. Mapping of Payload Type Parameters to SDP ..........<a href="#page-75">75</a>
           <a href="#section-7.2.2">7.2.2</a>. Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model ..............<a href="#page-76">76</a>
           7.2.3. Dependency Signaling in Multi-Session
                  Transmission .......................................<a href="#page-84">84</a>
           <a href="#section-7.2.4">7.2.4</a>. Usage in Declarative Session Descriptions ..........<a href="#page-85">85</a>
      <a href="#section-7.3">7.3</a>. Examples ..................................................<a href="#page-86">86</a>
           <a href="#section-7.3.1">7.3.1</a>. Example for Offering a Single SVC Session ..........<a href="#page-86">86</a>
           7.3.2. Example for Offering a Single SVC Session Using
                  scalable-layer-id ..................................<a href="#page-87">87</a>
           <a href="#section-7.3.3">7.3.3</a>. Example for Offering Multiple Sessions in MST ......<a href="#page-87">87</a>
           7.3.4. Example for Offering Multiple Sessions in
                  MST Including Operation with Answerer Using
                  scalable-layer-id ..................................<a href="#page-89">89</a>
           7.3.5. Example for Negotiating an SVC Stream with
                  a Constrained Base Layer in SST ....................<a href="#page-90">90</a>
      <a href="#section-7.4">7.4</a>. Parameter Set Considerations ..............................<a href="#page-91">91</a>
   <a href="#section-8">8</a>. Security Considerations ........................................<a href="#page-91">91</a>
   <a href="#section-9">9</a>. Congestion Control .............................................<a href="#page-92">92</a>
   <a href="#section-10">10</a>. IANA Considerations ...........................................<a href="#page-93">93</a>
   <a href="#section-11">11</a>. Informative Appendix: Application Examples ....................<a href="#page-93">93</a>
      <a href="#section-11.1">11.1</a>. Introduction .............................................<a href="#page-93">93</a>
      <a href="#section-11.2">11.2</a>. Layered Multicast ........................................<a href="#page-93">93</a>
      <a href="#section-11.3">11.3</a>. Streaming ................................................<a href="#page-94">94</a>
      11.4. Videoconferencing (Unicast to MANE, Unicast to
            Endpoints) ...............................................<a href="#page-95">95</a>
      <a href="#section-11.5">11.5</a>. Mobile TV (Multicast to MANE, Unicast to Endpoint) .......<a href="#page-96">96</a>
   <a href="#section-12">12</a>. Acknowledgements ..............................................<a href="#page-97">97</a>
   <a href="#section-13">13</a>. References ....................................................<a href="#page-97">97</a>
      <a href="#section-13.1">13.1</a>. Normative References .....................................<a href="#page-97">97</a>
      <a href="#section-13.2">13.2</a>. Informative References ...................................<a href="#page-98">98</a>








<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>.  Introduction</span>

   This memo specifies an RTP [<a href="./rfc3550" title="&quot;RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications&quot;">RFC3550</a>] payload format for the Scalable
   Video Coding (SVC) extension of the H.264/AVC video coding standard.
   SVC is specified in Amendment 3 to ISO/IEC 14496 Part 10
   [ISO/IEC14496-10] and equivalently in Annex G of ITU-T Rec. H.264
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  In this memo, unless explicitly stated otherwise,
   "H.264/AVC" refers to the specification of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] excluding Annex G.

   SVC covers the entire application range of H.264/AVC, from low-
   bitrate mobile applications, to High-Definition Television (HDTV)
   broadcasting, and even Digital Cinema that requires nearly lossless
   coding and hundreds of megabits per second.  The scalability features
   that SVC adds to H.264/AVC enable several system-level
   functionalities related to the ability of a system to adapt the
   signal to different system conditions with no or minimal processing.
   The adaptation relates both to the capabilities of potentially
   heterogeneous receivers (differing in screen resolution, processing
   speed, etc.), and to differing or time-varying network conditions.
   The adaptation can be performed at the source, the destination, or in
   intermediate media-aware network elements (MANEs).  The payload
   format specified in this memo exposes these system-level
   functionalities so that system designers can take direct advantage of
   these features.

      Informative note: Since SVC streams contain, by design, a sub-
      stream that is compliant with H.264/AVC, it is trivial for a MANE
      to filter the stream so that all SVC-specific information is
      removed.  This memo, in fact, defines a media type parameter
      (sprop-avc-ready, <a href="#section-7.2">Section 7.2</a>) that indicates whether or not the
      stream can be converted to one compliant with [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] by
      eliminating RTP packets, and rewriting RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)
      to match the changes to the RTP packet stream as specified in
      <a href="./rfc3550#section-7">Section&nbsp;7 of [RFC3550]</a>.

   This memo defines two basic modes for transmission of SVC data,
   single-session transmission (SST) and multi-session transmission
   (MST).  In SST, a single RTP session is used for the transmission of
   all scalability layers comprising an SVC bitstream; in MST, the
   scalability layers are transported on different RTP sessions.  In
   SST, packetization is a straightforward extension of [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  For
   MST, four different modes are defined in this memo.  They differ on
   whether or not they allow interleaving, i.e., transmitting Network
   Abstraction Layer (NAL) units in an order different than the decoding
   order, and by the technique used to effect inter-session NAL unit
   decoding order recovery.  Decoding order recovery is performed using
   either inter-session timestamp alignment [<a href="./rfc3550" title="&quot;RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications&quot;">RFC3550</a>] or cross-session
   decoding order numbers (CS-DONs).  One of the MST modes supports both



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   decoding order recovery techniques, so that receivers can select
   their preferred technique.  More details can be found in <a href="#section-1.2.2">Section</a>
   <a href="#section-1.2.2">1.2.2</a>.

   This memo further defines three new NAL unit types.  The first type
   is the payload content scalability information (PACSI) NAL unit,
   which is used to provide an informative summary of the scalability
   information of the data contained in an RTP packet, as well as
   ancillary data (e.g., CS-DON values).  The second and third new NAL
   unit types are the empty NAL unit and the non-interleaved multi-time
   aggregation packet (NI-MTAP) NAL unit.  The empty NAL unit is used to
   ensure inter-session timestamp alignment required for decoding order
   recovery in MST.  The NI-MTAP is used as a new payload structure
   allowing the grouping of NAL units of different time instances in
   decoding order.  More details about the new packet structures can be
   found in <a href="#section-1.2.3">Section 1.2.3</a>.

   This memo also defines the signaling support for SVC transport over
   RTP, including a new media subtype name (H264-SVC).

   A non-normative overview of the SVC codec and the payload is given in
   the remainder of this section.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1" href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>.  The SVC Codec</span>

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1.1" href="#section-1.1.1">1.1.1</a>.  Overview</span>

   SVC defines a coded video representation in which a given bitstream
   offers representations of the source material at different levels of
   fidelity (hence the term "scalable").  Scalable video coding
   bitstreams, or scalable bitstreams, are constructed in a pyramidal
   fashion: the coding process creates bitstream components that improve
   the fidelity of hierarchically lower components.

   The fidelity dimensions offered by SVC are spatial (picture size),
   quality (or Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR)), and temporal (pictures per
   second).  Bitstream components associated with a given level of
   spatial, quality, and temporal fidelity are identified using
   corresponding parameters in the bitstream: dependency_id, quality_id,
   and temporal_id (see also <a href="#section-1.1.3">Section 1.1.3</a>).  The fidelity identifiers
   have integer values, where higher values designate components that
   are higher in the hierarchy.  It is noted that SVC offers significant
   flexibility in terms of how an encoder may choose to structure the
   dependencies between the various components.  Decoding of a
   particular component requires the availability of all the components
   it depends upon, either directly, or indirectly.  An operation point





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   of an SVC bitstream consists of the bitstream components required to
   be able to decode a particular dependency_id, quality_id, and
   temporal_id combination.

   The term "layer" is used in various contexts in this memo.  For
   example, in the terms "Video Coding Layer" and "Network Abstraction
   Layer" it refers to conceptual organization levels.  When referring
   to bitstream syntax elements such as block layer or macroblock layer,
   it refers to hierarchical bitstream structure levels.  When used in
   the context of bitstream scalability, e.g., "AVC base layer", it
   refers to a level of representation fidelity of the source signal
   with a specific set of NAL units included.  The correct
   interpretation is supported by providing the appropriate context.

   SVC maintains the bitstream organization introduced in H.264/AVC.
   Specifically, all bitstream components are encapsulated in Network
   Abstraction Layer (NAL) units, which are organized as Access Units
   (AUs).  An AU is associated with a single sampling instance in time.
   A subset of the NAL unit types correspond to the Video Coding Layer
   (VCL), and contain the coded picture data associated with the source
   content.  Non-VCL NAL units carry ancillary data that may be
   necessary for decoding (e.g., parameter sets as explained below) or
   that facilitate certain system operations but are not needed by the
   decoding process itself.  Coded picture data at the various fidelity
   dimensions are organized in slices.  Within one AU, a coded picture
   of an operation point consists of all the coded slices required for
   decoding up to the particular combination of dependency_id and
   quality_id values at the time instance corresponding to the AU.

   It is noted that the concept of temporal scalability is already
   present in H.264/AVC, as profiles defined in Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]
   already support it.  Specifically, in H.264/AVC, the concept of sub-
   sequences has been introduced to allow optional use of temporal
   layers through Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages.
   SVC extends this approach by exposing the temporal scalability
   information using the temporal_id parameter, alongside (and unified
   with) the dependency_id and quality_id values that are used for
   spatial and quality scalability, respectively.  For coded picture
   data defined in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], this is accomplished by using a
   new type of NAL unit, namely, coded slice in scalable extension NAL
   unit (type 20), where the fidelity parameters are part of its header.
   For coded picture data that follow H.264/AVC, and to ensure
   compatibility with existing H.264/AVC decoders, another new type of
   NAL unit, namely, prefix NAL unit (type 14), has been defined to
   carry this header information.  SVC additionally specifies a third
   new type of NAL unit, namely, subset sequence parameter set NAL unit
   (type 15), to contain sequence parameter set information for quality
   and spatial enhancement layers.  All these three newly specified NAL



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   unit types (14, 15, and 20) are among those reserved in H.264/AVC and
   are to be ignored by decoders conforming to one or more of the
   profiles specified in Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   Within an AU, the VCL NAL units associated with a given dependency_id
   and quality_id are referred to as a "layer representation".  The
   layer representation corresponding to the lowest values of
   dependency_id and quality_id (i.e., zero for both) is compliant by
   design to H.264/AVC.  The set of VCL and associated non-VCL NAL units
   across all AUs in a bitstream associated with a particular
   combination of values of dependency_id and quality_id, and regardless
   of the value of temporal_id, is conceptually a scalable layer.  For
   backward compatibility with H.264/AVC, it is important to
   differentiate, however, whether or not SVC-specific NAL units are
   present in a given bitstream.  This is particularly important for the
   lowest fidelity values in terms of dependency_id and quality_id (zero
   for both), as the corresponding VCL data are compliant with
   H.264/AVC, and may or may not be accompanied by associated prefix NAL
   units.  This memo therefore uses the term "AVC base layer" to
   designate the layer that does not contain SVC-specific NAL units, and
   "SVC base layer" to designate the same layer but with the addition of
   the associated SVC prefix NAL units.  Note that the SVC specification
   uses the term "base layer" for what in this memo will be referred to
   as "AVC base layer".  Similarly, it is also important to be able to
   differentiate, within a layer, the temporal fidelity components it
   contains.  This memo uses the term "T0" to indicate, within a
   particular layer, the subset that contains the NAL units associated
   with temporal_id equal to 0.

   SNR scalability in SVC is offered in two different ways.  In what is
   called coarse-grain scalability (CGS), scalability is provided by
   including or excluding a complete layer when decoding a particular
   bitstream.  In contrast, in medium-grain scalability (MGS),
   scalability is provided by selectively omitting the decoding of
   specific NAL units belonging to MGS layers.  The selection of the NAL
   units to omit can be based on fixed-length fields present in the NAL
   unit header (see also Sections <a href="#section-1.1.3">1.1.3</a> and <a href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>).

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1.2" href="#section-1.1.2">1.1.2</a>.  Parameter Sets</span>

   SVC maintains the parameter sets concept in H.264/AVC and introduces
   a new type of sequence parameter set, referred to as the subset
   sequence parameter set [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  Subset sequence parameter sets have
   NAL unit type equal to 15, which is different from the NAL unit type
   value (7) of sequence parameter sets.  VCL NAL units of NAL unit type
   1 to 5 must only (indirectly) refer to sequence parameter sets, while
   VCL NAL units of NAL unit type 20 must only (indirectly) refer to
   subset sequence parameter sets.  The references are indirect because



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   VCL NAL units refer to picture parameter sets (in their slice
   header), which in turn refer to regular or subset sequence parameter
   sets.  Subset sequence parameter sets use a separate identifier value
   space than sequence parameter sets.

   In SVC, coded picture data from different layers may use the same or
   different sequence and picture parameter sets.  Let the variable DQId
   be equal to dependency_id * 16 + quality_id.  At any time instant
   during the decoding process there is one active sequence parameter
   set for the layer representation with the highest value of DQId and
   one or more active layer SVC sequence parameter set(s) for layer
   representations with lower values of DQId.  The active sequence
   parameter set or an active layer SVC sequence parameter set remains
   unchanged throughout a coded video sequence in the scalable layer in
   which the active sequence parameter set or active layer SVC sequence
   parameter set is referred to.  This means that the referred sequence
   parameter set or subset sequence parameter set can only change at
   instantaneous decoding refresh (IDR) access units for any layer.  At
   any time instant during the decoding process there may be one active
   picture parameter set (for the layer representation with the highest
   value of DQId) and one or more active layer picture parameter set(s)
   (for layer representations with lower values of DQId).  The active
   picture parameter set or an active layer picture parameter set
   remains unchanged throughout a layer representation in which the
   active picture parameter set or active layer picture parameter set is
   referred to, but may change from one AU to the next.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1.3" href="#section-1.1.3">1.1.3</a>.  NAL Unit Header</span>

   SVC extends the one-byte H.264/AVC NAL unit header by three
   additional octets for NAL units of types 14 and 20.  The header
   indicates the type of the NAL unit, the (potential) presence of bit
   errors or syntax violations in the NAL unit payload, information
   regarding the relative importance of the NAL unit for the decoding
   process, the layer identification information, and other fields as
   discussed below.

   The syntax and semantics of the NAL unit header are specified in
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], but the essential properties of the NAL unit header are
   summarized below for convenience.

   The first byte of the NAL unit header has the following format (the
   bit fields are the same as defined for the one-byte H.264/AVC NAL
   unit header, while the semantics of some fields have changed
   slightly, in a backward-compatible way):






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         +---------------+
         |0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
         |F|NRI|  Type   |
         +---------------+

   The semantics of the components of the NAL unit type octet, as
   specified in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], are described briefly below.  In addition to
   the name and size of each field, the corresponding syntax element
   name in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] is also provided.

   F:    1 bit
         forbidden_zero_bit.  H.264/AVC declares a value of 1 as a
         syntax violation.

   NRI:  2 bits
         nal_ref_idc.  A value of "00" (in binary form) indicates that
         the content of the NAL unit is not used to reconstruct
         reference pictures for future prediction.  Such NAL units can
         be discarded without risking the integrity of the reference
         pictures in the same layer.  A value greater than "00"
         indicates that the decoding of the NAL unit is required to
         maintain the integrity of reference pictures in the same layer
         or that the NAL unit contains parameter sets.

   Type: 5 bits
         nal_unit_type.  This component specifies the NAL unit type as
         defined in Table 7-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], and later within this memo.
         For a reference of all currently defined NAL unit types and
         their semantics, please refer to Section 7.4.1 in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

         In H.264/AVC, NAL unit types 14, 15, and 20 are reserved for
         future extensions.  SVC uses these three NAL unit types as
         follows: NAL unit type 14 is used for prefix NAL unit, NAL unit
         type 15 is used for subset sequence parameter set, and NAL unit
         type 20 is used for coded slice in scalable extension (see
         Section 7.4.1 in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]).  NAL unit types 14 and 20 indicate
         the presence of three additional octets in the NAL unit header,
         as shown below.

            +---------------+---------------+---------------+
            |0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
            +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
            |R|I|   PRID    |N| DID |  QID  | TID |U|D|O| RR|
            +---------------+---------------+---------------+






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 10]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-11" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   R:    1 bit
         reserved_one_bit.  Reserved bit for future extension.  R must
         be equal to 1.  The value of R must be ignored by decoders.

   I:    1 bit
         idr_flag.  This component specifies whether the layer
         representation is an instantaneous decoding refresh (IDR) layer
         representation (when equal to 1) or not (when equal to 0).

   PRID: 6 bits
         priority_id.  This flag specifies a priority identifier for the
         NAL unit.  A lower value of PRID indicates a higher priority.

   N:    1 bit
         no_inter_layer_pred_flag.  This flag specifies, when present in
         a coded slice NAL unit, whether inter-layer prediction may be
         used for decoding the coded slice (when equal to 1) or not
         (when equal to 0).

   DID:  3 bits
         dependency_id.  This component indicates the inter-layer coding
         dependency level of a layer representation.  At any access
         unit, a layer representation with a given dependency_id may be
         used for inter-layer prediction for coding of a layer
         representation with a higher dependency_id, while a layer
         representation with a given dependency_id shall not be used for
         inter-layer prediction for coding of a layer representation
         with a lower dependency_id.

   QID:  4 bits
         quality_id.  This component indicates the quality level of an
         MGS layer representation.  At any access unit and for identical
         dependency_id values, a layer representation with quality_id
         equal to ql uses a layer representation with quality_id equal
         to ql-1 for inter-layer prediction.

   TID:  3 bits
         temporal_id.  This component indicates the temporal level of a
         layer representation.  The temporal_id is associated with the
         frame rate, with lower values of _temporal_id corresponding to
         lower frame rates.  A layer representation at a given
         temporal_id typically depends on layer representations with
         lower temporal_id values, but it never depends on layer
         representations with higher temporal_id values.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 11]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-12" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   U:    1 bit
         use_ref_base_pic_flag.  A value of 1 indicates that only
         reference base pictures are used during the inter prediction
         process.  A value of 0 indicates that the reference base
         pictures are not used during the inter prediction process.

   D:    1 bit
         discardable_flag.  A value of 1 indicates that the current NAL
         unit is not used for decoding NAL units with values of
         dependency_id higher than the one of the current NAL unit, in
         the current and all subsequent access units.  Such NAL units
         can be discarded without risking the integrity of layers with
         higher dependency_id values.  discardable_flag equal to 0
         indicates that the decoding of the NAL unit is required to
         maintain the integrity of layers with higher dependency_id.

   O:    1 bit
         output_flag: Affects the decoded picture output process as
         defined in Annex C of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   RR:   2 bits
         reserved_three_2bits.  Reserved bits for future extension.  RR
         MUST be equal to "11" (in binary form).  The value of RR must
         be ignored by decoders.

   This memo extends the semantics of F, NRI, I, PRID, DID, QID, TID, U,
   and D per Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] as described in <a href="#section-4.2">Section 4.2</a>.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.2" href="#section-1.2">1.2</a>.  Overview of the Payload Format</span>

   Similar to [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], this payload format can only be used to carry
   the raw NAL unit stream over RTP and not the bytestream format
   specified in Annex B of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   The design principles, transmission modes, and packetization modes as
   well as new payload structures are summarized in this section.  It is
   assumed that the reader is familiar with the terminology and concepts
   defined in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.2.1" href="#section-1.2.1">1.2.1</a>.  Design Principles</span>

   The following design principles have been observed for this payload
   format:

   o  Backward compatibility with [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] wherever possible.






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 12]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-13" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  The SVC base layer or any H.264/AVC compatible subset of the SVC
      base layer, when transmitted in its own RTP stream, must be
      encapsulated using [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  This ensures that such an RTP
      stream can be understood by [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] receivers.

   o  Media-aware network elements (MANEs) as defined in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] are
      signaling-aware, rely on signaling information, and have state.

   o  MANEs can aggregate multiple RTP streams, possibly from multiple
      RTP sessions.

   o  MANEs can perform media-aware stream thinning (selective
      elimination of packets or portions thereof).  By using the payload
      header information identifying layers within an RTP session, MANEs
      are able to remove packets or portions thereof from the incoming
      RTP packet stream.  This implies rewriting the RTP headers of the
      outgoing packet stream, and rewriting of RTCP packets as specified
      in <a href="./rfc3550#section-7">Section&nbsp;7 of [RFC3550]</a>.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.2.2" href="#section-1.2.2">1.2.2</a>.  Transmission Modes and Packetization Modes</span>

   This memo allows the packetization of SVC data for both single-
   session transmission (SST) and multi-session transmission (MST).  In
   the case of SST all SVC data are carried in a single RTP session.  In
   the case of MST two or more RTP sessions are used to carry the SVC
   data, in accordance with the MST-specific packetization modes defined
   in this memo, which are based on the packetization modes defined in
   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  In MST, each RTP session is associated with one RTP
   stream, which may carry one or more layers.

   The base layer is, by design, compatible to H.264/AVC.  During
   transmission, the associated prefix NAL units, which are introduced
   by SVC and, when present, are ignored by H.264/AVC decoders, may be
   encapsulated within the same RTP packet stream as the H.264/AVC VCL
   NAL units or in a different RTP packet stream (when MST is used).
   For convenience, the term "AVC base layer" is used to refer to the
   base layer without prefix NAL units, while the term "SVC base layer"
   is used to refer to the base layer with prefix NAL units.

   Furthermore, the base layer may have multiple temporal components
   (i.e., supporting different frame rates).  As a result, the lowest
   temporal component ("T0") of the AVC or SVC base layer is used as the
   starting point of the SVC bitstream hierarchy.

   This memo allows encapsulating in a given RTP stream any of the
   following three alternatives of layer combinations:





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 13]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-14" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   1. the T0 AVC base layer or the T0 SVC base layer only;
   2. one or more enhancement layers only; or
   3. the T0 SVC base layer, and one or more enhancement layers.

   SST should be used in point-to-point unicast applications and, in
   general, whenever the potential benefit of using multiple RTP
   sessions does not justify the added complexity.  When SST is used,
   the layer combination cases 1 and 3 above can be used.  When an
   H.264/AVC compatible subset of the SVC base layer is transmitted
   using SST, the packetization of [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] must be used, thus ensuring
   compatibility with [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] receivers.  When, however, one or more
   SVC quality or spatial enhancement layers are transmitted using SST,
   the packetization defined in this memo must be used.  In SST, any of
   the three [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] packetization modes, namely, single NAL unit
   mode, non-interleaved mode, and interleaved mode, can be used.

   MST should be used in a multicast session when different receivers
   may request different layers of the scalable bitstream.  An operation
   point for an SVC bitstream, as defined in this memo, corresponds to a
   set of layers that together conform to one of the profiles defined in
   Annex A or G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and, when decoded, offer a representation of
   the original video at a certain fidelity.  The number of streams used
   in MST should be at least equal to the number of operation points
   that may be requested by the receivers.  Depending on the
   application, this may result in each layer being carried in its own
   RTP session, or in having multiple layers encapsulated within one RTP
   session.

      Informative note: Layered multicast is a term commonly used to
      describe the application where multicast is used to transmit
      layered or scalable data that has been encapsulated into more than
      one RTP session.  This application allows different receivers in
      the multicast session to receive different operation points of the
      scalable bitstream.  Layered multicast, among other application
      examples, is discussed in more detail in <a href="#section-11.2">Section 11.2</a>.

   When MST is used, any of the three layer combinations above can be
   used for each of the sessions.  When an H.264/AVC compatible subset
   of the SVC base layer is transmitted in its own session in MST, the
   packetization of [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] must be used, such that [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>]
   receivers can be part of the MST and receive only this session.  For
   MST, this memo defines four different MST-specific packetization
   modes, namely, non-interleaved timestamp (NI-T) based mode, non-
   interleaved CS-DON (NI-C) based mode, non-interleaved combined
   timestamp and CS-DON mode (NI-TC), and interleaved CS-DON (I-C) based
   mode (detailed in <a href="#section-4.5.2">Section 4.5.2</a>).  The modes differ depending on
   whether the SVC data are allowed to be interleaved, i.e., to be
   transmitted in an order different than the intended decoding order,



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 14]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-15" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   and they also differ in the mechanisms provided in order to recover
   the correct decoding order of the NAL units across the multiple RTP
   sessions.  These four MST modes reuse the packetization modes
   introduced in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] for the packetization of NAL units in each of
   their individual RTP sessions.

   As the names of the MST packetization modes imply, the NI-T, NI-C,
   and NI-TC modes do not allow interleaved transmission, while the I-C
   mode allows interleaved transmission.  With any of the three non-
   interleaved MST packetization modes, legacy [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] receivers with
   implementation of the non-interleaved mode specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] can
   join a multi-session transmission of SVC, to receive the base RTP
   session encapsulated according to [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.2.3" href="#section-1.2.3">1.2.3</a>.  New Payload Structures</span>

   [<a id="ref-RFC6184">RFC6184</a>] specifies three basic payload structures, namely, single
   NAL unit packet, aggregation packet, and fragmentation unit.
   Depending on the basic payload structure, an RTP packet may contain a
   NAL unit not aggregating other NAL units, one or more NAL units
   aggregated in another NAL unit, or a fragment of a NAL unit not
   aggregating other NAL units.  Each NAL unit of a type specified in
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] (i.e., 1 to 23, inclusive) may be carried in its entirety in
   a single NAL unit packet, may be aggregated in an aggregation packet,
   or may be fragmented and carried in a number of fragmentation unit
   packets.  To enable aggregation or fragmentation of NAL units while
   still ensuring that the RTP packet payload is only composed of NAL
   units, [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] introduced six new NAL unit types (24-29) to be used
   as payload structures, selected from the NAL unit types left
   unspecified in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   This memo reuses all the payload structures used in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].
   Furthermore, three new types of NAL units are defined: payload
   content scalability information (PACSI) NAL unit, empty NAL unit, and
   non-interleaved multi-time aggregation packet (NI-MTAP) (specified in
   Sections <a href="#section-4.9">4.9</a>, <a href="#section-4.10">4.10</a>, and <a href="#section-4.7.1">4.7.1</a>, respectively).

   PACSI NAL units may be used for the following purposes:

   o  To enable MANEs to decide whether to forward, process, or discard
      aggregation packets, by checking in PACSI NAL units the
      scalability information and other characteristics of the
      aggregated NAL units, rather than looking into the aggregated NAL
      units themselves, which are defined by the video coding
      specification.






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 15]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-16" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  To enable correct decoding order recovery in MST using the NI-C or
      NI-TC mode, with the help of the CS-DON information included in
      PACSI NAL units.

   o  To improve resilience to packet losses, e.g., by utilizing the
      following data or information included in PACSI NAL units:
      repeated Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages,
      information regarding the start and end of layer representations,
      and the indices to layer representations of the lowest temporal
      subset.

   Empty NAL units may be used to enable correct decoding order recovery
   in MST using the NI-T or NI-TC mode.  NI-MTAP NAL units may be used
   to aggregate NAL units from multiple access units but without
   interleaving.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>.  Conventions</span>

   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 <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>
   [<a href="./rfc2119" title="&quot;Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels&quot;">RFC2119</a>].

   This specification uses the notion of setting and clearing a bit when
   bit fields are handled.  Setting a bit is the same as assigning that
   bit the value of 1 (On).  Clearing a bit is the same as assigning
   that bit the value of 0 (Off).

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>.  Definitions and Abbreviations</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1" href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>.  Definitions</span>

   This document uses the terms and definitions of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  <a href="#section-3.1.1">Section</a>
   <a href="#section-3.1.1">3.1.1</a> lists relevant definitions copied from [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for convenience.

   When there is discrepancy, the definitions in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] take
   precedence.  <a href="#section-3.1.2">Section 3.1.2</a> gives definitions specific to this memo.
   Some of the definitions in <a href="#section-3.1.2">Section 3.1.2</a> are also present in
   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] and copied here with slight adaptations as needed.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1.1" href="#section-3.1.1">3.1.1</a>.  Definitions from the SVC Specification</span>

   access unit: A set of NAL units always containing exactly one primary
   coded picture.  In addition to the primary coded picture, an access
   unit may also contain one or more redundant coded pictures, one
   auxiliary coded picture, or other NAL units not containing slices or
   slice data partitions of a coded picture.  The decoding of an access
   unit always results in a decoded picture.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 16]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-17" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   base layer: A bitstream subset that contains all the NAL units with
   the nal_unit_type syntax element equal to 1 or 5 of the bitstream and
   does not contain any NAL unit with the nal_unit_type syntax element
   equal to 14, 15, or 20 and conforms to one or more of the profiles
   specified in Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   base quality layer representation: The layer representation of the
   target dependency representation of an access unit that is associated
   with the quality_id syntax element equal to 0.

   coded video sequence: A sequence of access units that consists, in
   decoding order, of an IDR access unit followed by zero or more non-
   IDR access units including all subsequent access units up to but not
   including any subsequent IDR access unit.

   dependency representation: A subset of Video Coding Layer (VCL) NAL
   units within an access unit that are associated with the same value
   of the dependency_id syntax element, which is provided as part of the
   NAL unit header or by an associated prefix NAL unit.  A dependency
   representation consists of one or more layer representations.

   IDR access unit: An access unit in which the primary coded picture is
   an IDR picture.

   IDR picture: Instantaneous decoding refresh picture.  A coded picture
   in which all slices of the target dependency representation within
   the access unit are I or EI slices that causes the decoding process
   to mark all reference pictures as "unused for reference" immediately
   after decoding the IDR picture.  After the decoding of an IDR picture
   all following coded pictures in decoding order can be decoded without
   inter prediction from any picture decoded prior to the IDR picture.
   The first picture of each coded video sequence is an IDR picture.

   layer representation: A subset of VCL NAL units within an access unit
   that are associated with the same values of the dependency_id and
   quality_id syntax elements, which are provided as part of the VCL NAL
   unit header or by an associated prefix NAL unit.  One or more layer
   representations represent a dependency representation.

   prefix NAL unit: A NAL unit with nal_unit_type equal to 14 that
   immediately precedes in decoding order a NAL unit with nal_unit_type
   equal to 1, 5, or 12.  The NAL unit that immediately succeeds in
   decoding order the prefix NAL unit is referred to as the associated
   NAL unit.  The prefix NAL unit contains data associated with the
   associated NAL unit, which are considered to be part of the
   associated NAL unit.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 17]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-18" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   reference base picture: A reference picture that is obtained by
   decoding a base quality layer representation with the nal_ref_idc
   syntax element not equal to 0 and the store_ref_base_pic_flag syntax
   element equal to 1 of an access unit and all layer representations of
   the access unit that are referred to by inter-layer prediction of the
   base quality layer representation.  A reference base picture is not
   an output of the decoding process, but the samples of a reference
   base picture may be used for inter prediction in the decoding process
   of subsequent pictures in decoding order.  Reference base picture is
   a collective term for a reference base field or a reference base
   frame.

   scalable bitstream: A bitstream with the property that one or more
   bitstream subsets that are not identical to the scalable bitstream
   form another bitstream that conforms to the SVC specification
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   target dependency representation: The dependency representation of an
   access unit that is associated with the largest value of the
   dependency_id syntax element for all dependency representations of
   the access unit.

   target layer representation: The layer representation of the target
   dependency representation of an access unit that is associated with
   the largest value of the quality_id syntax element for all layer
   representations of the target dependency representation of the access
   unit.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1.2" href="#section-3.1.2">3.1.2</a>.  Definitions Specific to This Memo</span>

   anchor layer representation: An anchor layer representation is such a
   layer representation that, if decoding of the operation point
   corresponding to the layer starts from the access unit containing
   this layer representation, all the following layer representations of
   the layer, in output order, can be correctly decoded.  The output
   order is defined in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] as the order in which decoded pictures
   are output from the decoded picture buffer of the decoder.  As H.264
   does not specify the picture display process, this more general term
   is used instead of display order.  An anchor layer representation is
   a random access point to the layer the anchor layer representation
   belongs.  However, some layer representations, succeeding an anchor
   layer representation in decoding order but preceding the anchor layer
   representation in output order, may refer to earlier layer
   representations for inter prediction, and hence the decoding may be
   incorrect if random access is performed at the anchor layer
   representation.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 18]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-19" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   AVC base layer: The subset of the SVC base layer in which all prefix
   NAL units (type 14) are removed.  Note that this is equivalent to the
   term "base layer" as defined in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   base RTP session: When multi-session transmission is used, the RTP
   session that carries the RTP stream containing the T0 AVC base layer
   or the T0 SVC base layer, and zero or more enhancement layers.  This
   RTP session does not depend on any other RTP session as indicated by
   mechanisms defined in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a>.  The base RTP session may carry
   NAL units of NAL unit type equal to 14 and 15.

   decoding order number (DON): A field in the payload structure or a
   derived variable indicating NAL unit decoding order.  Values of DON
   are in the range of 0 to 65535, inclusive.  After reaching the
   maximum value, the value of DON wraps around to 0.  Note that this
   definition also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in exactly the same form.

   Empty NAL unit: A NAL unit with NAL unit type equal to 31 and sub-
   type equal to 1.  An empty NAL unit consists of only the two-byte NAL
   unit header with an empty payload.

   enhancement RTP session: When multi-session transmission is used, an
   RTP session that is not the base RTP session.  An enhancement RTP
   session typically contains an RTP stream that depends on at least one
   other RTP session as indicated by mechanisms defined in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section</a>
   <a href="#section-7.2.3">7.2.3</a>.  A lower RTP session to an enhancement RTP session is an RTP
   session on which the enhancement RTP session depends.  The lowest RTP
   session for a receiver is the RTP session that does not depend on any
   other RTP session received by the receiver.  The highest RTP session
   for a receiver is the RTP session on which no other RTP session
   received by the receiver depends.

   cross-session decoding order number (CS-DON): A derived variable
   indicating NAL unit decoding order number over all NAL units within
   all the session-multiplexed RTP sessions that carry the same SVC
   bitstream.

   default level: The level indicated by the profile-level-id parameter.
   In Session Description Protocol (SDP) Offer/Answer, the level is
   downgradable, i.e., the answer may either use the default level or a
   lower level.  Note that this definition also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in a
   slightly different form.

   default sub-profile: The subset of coding tools, which may be all
   coding tools of one profile or the common subset of coding tools of
   more than one profile, indicated by the profile-level-id parameter.
   In SDP Offer/Answer, the default sub-profile must be used in a




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 19]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-20" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   symmetric manner, i.e., the answer must either use the same sub-
   profile as the offer or reject the offer.  Note that this definition
   also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in a slightly different form.

   enhancement layer: A layer in which at least one of the values of
   dependency_id or quality_id is higher than 0, or a layer in which
   none of the NAL units is associated with the value of temporal_id
   equal to 0.  An operation point constructed using the maximum
   temporal_id, dependency_id, and quality_id values associated with an
   enhancement layer may or may not conform to one or more of the
   profiles specified in Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   H.264/AVC compatible: The property of a bitstream subset of
   conforming to one or more of the profiles specified in Annex A of
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   intra layer representation:  A layer representation that contains
   only slices that use intra prediction, and hence do not refer to any
   earlier layer representation in decoding order in the same layer.
   Note that in SVC intra prediction includes intra-layer intra
   prediction as well as inter-layer intra prediction.

   layer: A bitstream subset in which all NAL units of type 1, 5, 12,
   14, or 20 have the same values of dependency_id and quality_id,
   either directly through their NAL unit header (for NAL units of type
   14 or 20) or through association to a prefix (type 14) NAL unit (for
   NAL unit type 1, 5, or 12).  A layer may contain NAL units associated
   with more than one values of temporal_id.

   media-aware network element (MANE): A network element, such as a
   middlebox or application layer gateway that is capable of parsing
   certain aspects of the RTP payload headers or the RTP payload and
   reacting to their contents.  Note that this definition also exists in
   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in exactly the same form.

      Informative note: The concept of a MANE goes beyond normal routers
      or gateways in that a MANE has to be aware of the signaling (e.g.,
      to learn about the payload type mappings of the media streams),
      and in that it has to be trusted when working with Secure Real-
      time Transport Protocol (SRTP).  The advantage of using MANEs is
      that they allow packets to be dropped according to the needs of
      the media coding.  For example, if a MANE has to drop packets due
      to congestion on a certain link, it can identify and remove those
      packets whose elimination produces the least adverse effect on the
      user experience.  After dropping packets, MANEs must rewrite RTCP
      packets to match the changes to the RTP packet stream as specified
      in <a href="./rfc3550#section-7">Section&nbsp;7 of [RFC3550]</a>.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 20]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-21" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   multi-session transmission: The transmission mode in which the SVC
   stream is transmitted over multiple RTP sessions.  Dependency between
   RTP sessions MUST be signaled according to <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a> of this
   memo.

   NAL unit decoding order: A NAL unit order that conforms to the
   constraints on NAL unit order given in Section G.7.4.1.2 in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].
   Note that this definition also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in a slightly
   different form.

   NALU-time: The value that the RTP timestamp would have if the NAL
   unit would be transported in its own RTP packet.  Note that this
   definition also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in exactly the same form.

   operation point: An operation point is identified by a set of values
   of temporal_id, dependency_id, and quality_id.  A bitstream
   corresponding to an operation point can be constructed by removing
   all NAL units associated with a higher value of dependency_id, and
   all NAL units associated with the same value of dependency_id but
   higher values of quality_id or temporal_id.  An operation point
   bitstream conforms to at least one of the profiles defined in Annex A
   or G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], and offers a representation of the original video
   signal at a certain fidelity.

      Informative note: Additional NAL units may be removed (with lower
      dependency_id or same dependency_id but lower quality_id) if they
      are not required for decoding the bitstream at the particular
      operation point.  The resulting bitstream, however, may no longer
      conform to any of the profiles defined in Annex A or G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   operation point representation: The set of all NAL units of an
   operation point within the same access unit.

   RTP packet stream: A sequence of RTP packets with increasing sequence
   numbers (except for wrap-around), identical payload type and
   identical SSRC (Synchronization Source), carried in one RTP session.
   Within the scope of this memo, one RTP packet stream is utilized to
   transport one or more layers.

   single-session transmission: The transmission mode in which the SVC
   bitstream is transmitted over a single RTP session.

   SVC base layer: The layer that includes all NAL units associated with
   dependency_id and quality_id values both equal to 0, including prefix
   NAL units (NAL unit type 14).






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 21]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-22" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   SVC enhancement layer: A layer in which at least one of the values of
   dependency_id or quality_id is higher than 0.  An operation point
   constructed using the maximum dependency_id and quality_id values and
   any temporal_id value associated with an SVC enhancement layer does
   not conform to any of the profiles specified in Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   SVC NAL unit: A NAL unit of NAL unit type 14, 15, or 20 as specified
   in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].

   SVC NAL unit header: A four-byte header resulting from the addition
   of a three-byte SVC-specific header extension added in NAL unit types
   14 and 20.

   SVC RTP session: Either the base RTP session or an enhancement RTP
   session.

   T0 AVC base layer: A subset of the AVC base layer constructed by
   removing all VCL NAL units associated with temporal_id values higher
   than 0 and non-VCL NAL units and SEI messages associated only with
   the VCL NAL units being removed.

   T0 SVC base layer: A subset of the SVC base layer constructed by
   removing all VCL NAL units associated with temporal_id values higher
   than 0 as well as prefix NAL units, non-VCL NAL units, and SEI
   messages associated only with the VCL NAL units being removed.

   transmission order: The order of packets in ascending RTP sequence
   number order (in modulo arithmetic).  Within an aggregation packet,
   the NAL unit transmission order is the same as the order of
   appearance of NAL units in the packet.  Note that this definition
   also exists in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] in exactly the same form.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2" href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>.  Abbreviations</span>

   In addition to the abbreviations defined in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], the following
   abbreviations are used in this memo.

      CGS:        Coarse-Grain Scalability
      CS-DON:     Cross-Session Decoding Order Number
      MGS:        Medium-Grain Scalability
      MST:        Multi-Session Transmission
      PACSI:      Payload Content Scalability Information
      SST:        Single-Session Transmission
      SNR:        Signal-to-Noise Ratio
      SVC:        Scalable Video Coding






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 22]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-23" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>.  RTP Payload Format</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.1" href="#section-4.1">4.1</a>.  RTP Header Usage</span>

   In addition to <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.1">Section&nbsp;5.1 of [RFC6184]</a>, the following rules apply.

   o Setting of the M bit:

   The M bit of an RTP packet for which the packet payload is an NI-MTAP
   MUST be equal to 1 if the last NAL unit, in decoding order, of the
   access unit associated with the RTP timestamp is contained in the
   packet.

   o Setting of the RTP timestamp:

   For an RTP packet for which the packet payload is an empty NAL unit,
   the RTP timestamp must be set according to <a href="#section-4.10">Section 4.10</a>.

   For an RTP packet for which the packet payload is a PACSI NAL unit,
   the RTP timestamp MUST be equal to the NALU-time of the next non-
   PACSI NAL unit in transmission order.  Recall that the NALU-time of a
   NAL unit in an MTAP is defined in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] as the value that the RTP
   timestamp would have if that NAL unit would be transported in its own
   RTP packet.

   o Setting of the SSRC:

   For both SST and MST, the SSRC values MUST be set according to
   [<a href="./rfc3550" title="&quot;RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications&quot;">RFC3550</a>].

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2" href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>.  NAL Unit Extension and Header Usage</span>

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.1" href="#section-4.2.1">4.2.1</a>.  NAL Unit Extension</span>

   This memo specifies a NAL unit extension mechanism to allow for
   introduction of new types of NAL units, beyond the three NAL unit
   types left undefined in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] (i.e., 0, 30, and 31).  The
   extension mechanism utilizes the NAL unit type value 31 and is
   specified as follows.  When the NAL unit type value is equal to 31,
   the one-byte NAL unit header consisting of the F, NRI, and Type
   fields as specified in <a href="#section-1.1.3">Section 1.1.3</a> is extended by one additional
   octet, which consists of a 5-bit field named Subtype and three 1-bit
   fields named J, K, and L, respectively.  The additional octet is
   shown in the following figure.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 23]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-24" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         +---------------+
         |0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
         | Subtype |J|K|L|
         +---------------+

   The Subtype value determines the (extended) NAL unit type of this NAL
   unit.  The interpretation of the fields J, K, and L depends on the
   Subtype.  The semantics of the fields are as follows.

   When Subtype is equal to 1, the NAL unit is an empty NAL unit as
   specified in <a href="#section-4.10">Section 4.10</a>.  When Subtype is equal to 2, the NAL unit
   is an NI-MTAP NAL unit as specified in <a href="#section-4.7.1">Section 4.7.1</a>.  All other
   values of Subtype (0, 3-31) are reserved for future extensions, and
   receivers MUST ignore the entire NAL unit when Subtype is equal to
   any of these reserved values.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.2" href="#section-4.2.2">4.2.2</a>.  NAL Unit Header Usage</span>

   The structure and semantics of the NAL unit header according to the
   H.264 specification [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] were introduced in <a href="#section-1.1.3">Section 1.1.3</a>.  This
   section specifies the extended semantics of the NAL unit header
   fields F, NRI, I, PRID, DID, QID, TID, U, and D, according to this
   memo.  When the Type field is equal to 31, the semantics of the
   fields in the extension NAL unit header were specified in <a href="#section-4.2.1">Section</a>
   <a href="#section-4.2.1">4.2.1</a>.

   The semantics of F specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.3">Section&nbsp;5.3 of [RFC6184]</a> also apply
   in this memo.  That is, a value of 0 for F indicates that the NAL
   unit type octet and payload should not contain bit errors or other
   syntax violations, whereas a value of 1 for F indicates that the NAL
   unit type octet and payload may contain bit errors or other syntax
   violations.  MANEs SHOULD set the F bit to indicate bit errors in the
   NAL unit.

   For NRI, for a bitstream conforming to one of the profiles defined in
   Annex A of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and transported using [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], the semantics
   specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.3">Section&nbsp;5.3 of [RFC6184]</a> apply, i.e., NRI also indicates
   the relative importance of NAL units.  For a bitstream conforming to
   one of the profiles defined in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and transported
   using this memo, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of
   [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], NRI also indicates the relative importance of NAL units
   within a layer.

   For I, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to protect NAL
   units with I equal to 1 better than NAL units with I equal to 0.
   MANEs MAY also utilize information of NAL units with I equal to 1 to



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 24]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-25" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   decide when to forward more packets for an RTP packet stream.  For
   example, when it is detected that spatial layer switching has
   happened such that the operation point has changed to a higher value
   of DID, MANEs MAY start to forward NAL units with the higher value of
   DID only after forwarding a NAL unit with I equal to 1 with the
   higher value of DID.

   Note that, in the context of this section, "protecting a NAL unit"
   means any RTP or network transport mechanism that could improve the
   probability of successful delivery of the packet conveying the NAL
   unit, including applying a Quality of Service (QoS) enabled network,
   Forward Error Correction (FEC), retransmissions, and advanced
   scheduling behavior, whenever possible.

   For PRID, the semantics specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] apply.  Note
   that MANEs implementing unequal error protection MAY use this
   information to protect NAL units with smaller PRID values better than
   those with larger PRID values, for example, by including only the
   more important NAL units in a FEC protection mechanism.  The
   importance for the decoding process decreases as the PRID value
   increases.

   For DID, QID, or TID, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex
   G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], according to this memo, values of DID, QID, or TID
   indicate the relative importance in their respective dimension.  A
   lower value of DID, QID, or TID indicates a higher importance if the
   other two components are identical.  MANEs MAY use this information
   to protect more important NAL units better than less important NAL
   units.

   For U, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to protect NAL
   units with U equal to 1 better than NAL units with U equal to 0.

   For D, in addition to the semantics specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>],
   according to this memo, MANEs MAY use this information to determine
   whether a given NAL unit is required for successfully decoding a
   certain Operation Point of the SVC bitstream, hence to decide whether
   to forward the NAL unit.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.3" href="#section-4.3">4.3</a>.  Payload Structures</span>

   The NAL unit structure is central to H.264/AVC, [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], as well as
   SVC and this memo.  In H.264/AVC and SVC, all coded bits for
   representing a video signal are encapsulated in NAL units.  In
   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], each RTP packet payload is structured as a NAL unit, which
   contains one or a part of one NAL unit specified in H.264/AVC, or
   aggregates one or more NAL units specified in H.264/AVC.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 25]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-26" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   [<a id="ref-RFC6184">RFC6184</a>] specifies three basic payload structures (in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.2">Section&nbsp;5.2 of
   [RFC6184]</a>): single NAL unit packet, aggregation packet, fragmentation
   unit, and six new types (24 to 29) of NAL units.  The value of the
   Type field of the RTP packet payload header (i.e., the first byte of
   the payload) may be equal to any value from 1 to 23 for a single NAL
   unit packet, any value from 24 to 27 for an aggregation packet, and
   28 or 29 for a fragmentation unit.

   In addition to the NAL unit types defined originally for H.264/AVC,
   SVC defines three new NAL unit types specifically for SVC: coded
   slice in scalable extension NAL units (type 20), prefix NAL units
   (type 14), and subset sequence parameter set NAL units (type 15), as
   described in <a href="#section-1.1">Section 1.1</a>.

   This memo further introduces three new types of NAL units, PACSI NAL
   unit (NAL unit type 30) as specified in <a href="#section-4.9">Section 4.9</a>, empty NAL unit
   (type 31, subtype 1) as specified in <a href="#section-4.10">Section 4.10</a>, and NI-MTAP NAL
   unit (type 31, subtype 2) as specified in <a href="#section-4.7.1">Section 4.7.1</a>.

   The RTP packet payload structure in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] is maintained with
   slight extensions in this memo, as follows.  Each RTP packet payload
   is still structured as a NAL unit, which contains one or a part of
   one NAL unit specified in H.264/AVC and SVC, or contains one PACSI
   NAL unit or one empty NAL unit, or aggregates zero or more NAL units
   specified in H.264/AVC and SVC, zero or one PACSI NAL unit, and zero
   or more empty NAL units.

   In this memo, one of the three basic payload structures,
   fragmentation unit, remains the same as in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], and the other
   two, single NAL unit packet and aggregation packet, are extended as
   follows.  The value of the Type field of the payload header may be
   equal to any value from 1 to 23, inclusive, and 30 to 31, inclusive,
   for a single NAL unit packet, and any value from 24 to 27, inclusive,
   and 31, for an aggregation packet.  When the Type field of the
   payload header is equal to 31 and the Subtype field of the payload
   header is equal to 2, the packet is an aggregation packet (containing
   an NI-MTAP NAL unit).  When the Type field of the payload header is
   equal to 31 and the Subtype field of the payload header is equal to
   1, the packet is a single NAL unit packet (containing an empty NAL
   unit).

   Note that, in this memo, the length of the payload header varies
   depending on the value of the Type field in the first byte of the RTP
   packet payload.  If the value is equal to 14, 20, or 30, the first
   four bytes of the packet payload form the payload header; otherwise,
   if the value is equal to 31, the first two bytes of the payload form
   the payload header; otherwise, the payload header is the first byte
   of the packet payload.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 26]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-27" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Table 1 lists the NAL unit types introduced in SVC and this memo and
   where they are described in this memo.  Table 2 summarizes the basic
   payload structure types for all NAL unit types when they are directly
   used as RTP packet payloads according to this memo.  Table 3
   summarizes the NAL unit types allowed to be aggregated (i.e., used as
   aggregation units in aggregation packets) or fragmented (i.e.,
   carried in fragmentation units) according to this memo.

   Table 1.  NAL unit types introduced in SVC and this memo

   Type  Subtype  NAL Unit Name                Section Numbers
   -----------------------------------------------------------
   14     -       Prefix NAL unit                    1.1
   15     -       Subset sequence parameter set      1.1
   20     -       Coded slice in scalable extension  1.1
   30     -       PACSI NAL unit                     4.9
   31     0       reserved                           4.2.1
   31     1       Empty NAL unit                     4.10
   31     2       NI-MTAP                            4.7.1
   31     3-31    reserved                           4.2.1

   Table 2.  Basic payload structure types for all NAL unit
   types when they are directly used as RTP packet payloads

   Type   Subtype    Basic Payload Structure
   ------------------------------------------
   0      -          reserved
   1-23   -          Single NAL Unit Packet
   24-27  -          Aggregation Packet
   28-29  -          Fragmentation Unit
   30     -          Single NAL Unit Packet
   31     0          reserved
   31     1          Single NAL Unit Packet
   31     2          Aggregation Packet
   31     3-31       reserved
















<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 27]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-28" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Table 3.  Summary of the NAL unit types allowed to be
   aggregated or fragmented (yes = allowed, no = disallowed,
   - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type  Subtype STAP-A STAP-B MTAP16 MTAP24 FU-A FU-B NI-MTAP
   -------------------------------------------------------------
   0     -          -      -      -      -     -     -     -
   1-23  -        yes    yes    yes    yes   yes   yes   yes
   24-29 -         no     no     no     no    no    no    no
   30    -        yes    yes    yes    yes    no    no   yes
   31    0          -      -      -      -     -     -     -
   31    1        yes     no     no     no    no    no   yes
   31    2         no     no     no     no    no    no    no
   31    3-31       -      -      -      -     -     -     -

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.4" href="#section-4.4">4.4</a>.  Transmission Modes</span>

   This memo enables transmission of an SVC bitstream over one or more
   RTP sessions.  If only one RTP session is used for transmission of
   the SVC bitstream, the transmission mode is referred to as single-
   session transmission (SST); otherwise (more than one RTP session is
   used for transmission of the SVC bitstream), the transmission mode is
   referred to as multi-session transmission (MST).

   SST SHOULD be used for point-to-point unicast scenarios, while MST
   SHOULD be used for point-to-multipoint multicast scenarios where
   different receivers requires different operation points of the same
   SVC bitstream, to improve bandwidth utilizing efficiency.

   If the OPTIONAL mst-mode media type parameter (see <a href="#section-7.1">Section 7.1</a>) is
   not present, SST MUST be used; otherwise (mst-mode is present), MST
   MUST be used.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.5" href="#section-4.5">4.5</a>.  Packetization Modes</span>

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.5.1" href="#section-4.5.1">4.5.1</a>.  Packetization Modes for Single-Session Transmission</span>

   When SST is in use, <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.4">Section&nbsp;5.4 of [RFC6184]</a> applies with the
   following extensions.

   The packetization modes specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.4">Section&nbsp;5.4 of [RFC6184]</a>,
   namely, single NAL unit mode, non-interleaved mode, and interleaved
   mode, are also referred to as session packetization modes.  Table 4
   summarizes the allowed session packetization modes for SST.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 28]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-29" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Table 4.  Summary of allowed session packetization modes
   (denoted as "Session Mode" for simplicity) for SST (yes =
   allowed, no = disallowed)

   Session Mode               Allowed
   -------------------------------------
   Single NAL Unit Mode         yes
   Non-Interleaved Mode         yes
   Interleaved Mode             yes

   For NAL unit types in the range of 0 to 29, inclusive, the NAL unit
   types allowed to be directly used as packet payloads for each session
   packetization mode are the same as specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.4">Section&nbsp;5.4 of
   [RFC6184]</a>.  For other NAL unit types, which are newly introduced in
   this memo, the NAL unit types allowed to be directly used as packet
   payloads for each session packetization mode are summarized in Table
   5.

   Table 5.  New NAL unit types allowed to be directly used
   as packet payloads for each session packetization mode
   (yes = allowed, no = disallowed, - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type   Subtype    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved    Interleaved
                     Unit Mode           Mode             Mode
   -------------------------------------------------------------
   30     -            yes               no               no
   31     0              -                -                -
   31     1            yes              yes               no
   31     2             no              yes               no
   31     3-31           -                -                -

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.5.2" href="#section-4.5.2">4.5.2</a>.  Packetization Modes for Multi-Session Transmission</span>

   For MST, this memo specifies four MST packetization modes:

   o  Non-interleaved timestamp based mode (NI-T);

   o  Non-interleaved cross-session decoding order number (CS-DON) based
      mode (NI-C);

   o  Non-interleaved combined timestamp and CS-DON mode (NI-TC); and

   o  Interleaved CS-DON (I-C) mode.

   These four modes differ in two ways.  First, they differ in terms of
   whether NAL units are required to be transmitted within each RTP
   session in decoding order (i.e., non-interleaved), or they are
   allowed to be transmitted in a different order (i.e., interleaved).



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 29]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-30" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Second, they differ in the mechanisms they provide in order to
   recover the correct decoding order of the NAL units across all RTP
   sessions involved.

   The NI-T, NI-C, and NI-TC modes do not allow interleaving, and are
   thus targeted for systems that require relatively low end-to-end
   latency, e.g., conversational systems.  The I-C mode allows
   interleaving and is thus targeted for systems that do not require
   very low end-to-end latency.  The benefits of interleaving are the
   same as that of the interleaved mode specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

   The NI-T mode uses timestamps to recover the decoding order of NAL
   units, whereas the NI-C and I-C modes both use the CS-DON mechanism
   (explained later) to do so.  The NI-TC mode provides both timestamps
   and the CS-DON method; receivers in this case may choose to use
   either method for performing decoding order recovery.  The MST
   packetization mode in use MUST be signaled by the value of the
   OPTIONAL mst-mode media type parameter.  The used MST packetization
   mode governs which session packetization modes are allowed in the
   associated RTP sessions, which in turn govern which NAL unit types
   are allowed to be directly used as RTP packet payloads.

   Table 6 summarizes the allowed session packetization modes for NI-T,
   NI-C, and NI-TC.  Table 7 summarizes the allowed session
   packetization modes for I-C.

   Table 6.  Summary of allowed session packetization modes
   (denoted as "Session Mode" for simplicity) for NI-T, NI-C, and
   NI-TC (yes = allowed, no = disallowed)

   Session Mode            Base Session    Enhancement Session
   -----------------------------------------------------------
   Single NAL Unit Mode         yes             no
   Non-Interleaved Mode         yes            yes
   Interleaved Mode              no             no

   Table 7.  Summary of allowed session packetization modes
   (denoted as "Session Mode" for simplicity) for I-C
   (yes = allowed, no = disallowed)

   Session Mode            Base Session    Enhancement Session
   -----------------------------------------------------------
   Single NAL Unit Mode          no             no
   Non-Interleaved Mode          no             no
   Interleaved Mode             yes            yes






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 30]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-31" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   For NAL unit types in the range of 0 to 29, inclusive, the NAL unit
   types allowed to be directly used as packet payloads for each session
   packetization mode are the same as specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.4">Section&nbsp;5.4 of
   [RFC6184]</a>.  For other NAL unit types, which are newly introduced in
   this memo, the NAL unit types allowed to be directly used as packet
   payloads for each allowed session packetization mode for NI-T, NI-C,
   NI-TC, and I-C are summarized in Tables 8, 9, 10, and 11,
   respectively.

   Table 8.  New NAL unit types allowed to be directly used
   as packet payloads for each allowed session packetization
   mode when NI-T is in use (yes = allowed, no = disallowed,
   - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type   Subtype    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved
                     Unit Mode           Mode
   ---------------------------------------------------
   30     -            yes               no
   31     0              -                -
   31     1            yes              yes
   31     2             no              yes
   31     3-31           -                -

   Table 9.  New NAL unit types allowed to be directly used
   as packet payloads for each allowed session packetization
   mode when NI-C is in use (yes = allowed, no = disallowed,
   - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type   Subtype    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved
                     Unit Mode           Mode
   ---------------------------------------------------
   30     -            yes              yes
   31     0              -                -
   31     1             no               no
   31     2             no              yes
   31     3-31           -                -















<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 31]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-32" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Table 10.  New NAL unit types allowed to be directly used
   as packet payloads for each allowed session packetization
   mode when NI-TC is in use (yes = allowed, no = disallowed,
   - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type   Subtype    Single NAL    Non-Interleaved
                     Unit Mode           Mode
   ---------------------------------------------------
   30     -            yes              yes
   31     0              -                -
   31     1             yes             yes
   31     2             no              yes
   31     3-31           -                -

   Table 11.  New NAL unit types allowed to be directly used
   as packet payloads for the allowed session packetization
   mode when I-C is in use (yes = allowed, no = disallowed,
   - = not applicable/not specified)

   Type   Subtype    Interleaved Mode
   ------------------------------------
   30     -               no
   31     0                -
   31     1               no
   31     2               no
   31     3-31             -

   When MST is in use and the MST packetization mode in use is NI-C,
   empty NAL units (type 31, subtype 1) MUST NOT be used, i.e., no RTP
   packet is allowed to contain one or more empty NAL units.

   When MST is in use and the MST packetization mode in use is I-C, both
   empty NAL units (type 31, subtype 1) and NI-MTAP NAL units (type 31,
   subtype 2) MUST NOT be used, i.e., no RTP packet is allowed to
   contain one or more empty NAL units or an NI-MTAP NAL unit.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.6" href="#section-4.6">4.6</a>.  Single NAL Unit Packets</span>

   <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.6">Section&nbsp;5.6 of [RFC6184]</a> applies with the following extensions.

   The payload of a single NAL unit packet MAY be a PACSI NAL unit (Type
   30) or an empty NAL unit (Type 31 and Subtype 1), in addition to a
   NAL unit with NAL unit type equal to any value from 1 to 23,
   inclusive.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 32]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-33" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   If the Type field of the first byte of the payload is not equal to
   31, the payload header is the first byte of the payload.  Otherwise,
   (the Type field of the first byte of the payload is equal to 31), the
   payload header is the first two bytes of the payload.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.7" href="#section-4.7">4.7</a>.  Aggregation Packets</span>

   In addition to <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.7">Section&nbsp;5.7 of [RFC6184]</a>, the following applies in
   this memo.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.7.1" href="#section-4.7.1">4.7.1</a>.  Non-Interleaved Multi-Time Aggregation Packets (NI-MTAPs)</span>

   One new NAL unit type introduced in this memo is the non-interleaved
   multi-time aggregation packet (NI-MTAP).  An NI-MTAP consists of one
   or more non-interleaved multi-time aggregation units.

   The NAL units contained in NI-MTAPs MUST be aggregated in decoding
   order.

   A non-interleaved multi-time aggregation unit for the NI-MTAP
   consists of 16 bits of unsigned size information of the following NAL
   unit (in network byte order), and 16 bits (in network byte order) of
   timestamp offset (TS offset) for the NAL unit.  The structure is
   presented in Figure 1.  The starting or ending position of an
   aggregation unit within a packet may or may not be on a 32-bit word
   boundary.  The NAL units in the NI-MTAP are ordered in NAL unit
   decoding order.

   The Type field of the NI-MTAP MUST be set equal to "31".

   The F bit MUST be set to 0 if all the F bits of the aggregated NAL
   units are zero; otherwise, it MUST be set to 1.

   The value of NRI MUST be the maximum value of NRI across all NAL
   units carried in the NI-MTAP packet.

   The field Subtype MUST be equal to 2.

   If the field J is equal to 1, the optional DON field MUST be present
   for each of the non-interleaved multi-time aggregation units.  For
   SST, the J field MUST be equal to 0.  For MST, in the NI-T mode the J
   field MUST be equal to 0, whereas in the NI-C or NI-TC mode the J
   field MUST be equal to 1.  When the NI-C or NI-TC mode is in use, the
   DON field, when present, MUST represent the CS-DON value for the
   particular NAL unit as defined in <a href="#section-6.2.2">Section 6.2.2</a>.

   The fields K and L MUST be both equal to 0.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 33]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-34" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :        NAL unit size          |        TS offset              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        DON (optional)         |                               |
   |-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    NAL unit                   |
   |                                                               |
   |                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 1.  Non-interleaved multi-time aggregation unit for NI-MTAP

   Let TS be the RTP timestamp of the packet carrying the NAL unit.
   Recall that the NALU-time of a NAL unit in an MTAP is defined in
   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] as the value that the RTP timestamp would have if that NAL
   unit would be transported in its own RTP packet.  The timestamp
   offset field MUST be set to a value equal to the value of the
   following formula:

      if NALU-time &gt;= TS, TS offset = NALU-time - TS
      else, TS offset = NALU-time + (2^32 - TS)

   For the "earliest" multi-time aggregation unit in an NI-MTAP, the
   timestamp offset MUST be zero.  Hence, the RTP timestamp of the NI-
   MTAP itself is identical to the earliest NALU-time.

      Informative note: The "earliest" multi-time aggregation unit is
      the one that would have the smallest extended RTP timestamp among
      all the aggregation units of an NI-MTAP if the aggregation units
      were encapsulated in single NAL unit packets.  An extended
      timestamp is a timestamp that has more than 32 bits and is capable
      of counting the wraparound of the timestamp field, thus enabling
      one to determine the smallest value if the timestamp wraps.  Such
      an "earliest" aggregation unit may or may not be the first one in
      the order in which the aggregation units are encapsulated in an
      NI-MTAP.  The "earliest" NAL unit need not be the same as the
      first NAL unit in the NAL unit decoding order either.

   Figure 2 presents an example of an RTP packet that contains an NI-
   MTAP that contains two non-interleaved multi-time aggregation units,
   labeled as 1 and 2 in the figure.








<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 34]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-35" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


    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                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |F|NRI|  Type   | Subtype |J|K|L|                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               |
   |                                                               |
   |        Non-interleaved multi-time aggregation unit #1         |
   :                                                               :
   |                                 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                 |  Non-interleaved multi-time |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                             |
   |                      aggregation unit #2                      |
   :                                                               :
   |                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               :...OPTIONAL RTP padding        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 2.  An RTP packet including an NI-MTAP containing two
   non-interleaved multi-time aggregation units

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.8" href="#section-4.8">4.8</a>.  Fragmentation Units (FUs)</span>

   <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.8">Section&nbsp;5.8 of [RFC6184]</a> applies.

      Informative note: In case a NAL unit with the four-byte SVC NAL
      unit header is fragmented, the three-byte SVC-specific header
      extension is considered as part of the NAL unit payload.  That is,
      the three-byte SVC-specific header extension is only available in
      the first fragment of the fragmented NAL unit.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.9" href="#section-4.9">4.9</a>.  Payload Content Scalability Information (PACSI) NAL Unit</span>

   Another new type of NAL unit specified in this memo is the payload
   content scalability information (PACSI) NAL unit.  The Type field of
   PACSI NAL units MUST be equal to 30 (a NAL unit type value left
   unspecified in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>]).  A PACSI NAL unit MAY be
   carried in a single NAL unit packet or an aggregation packet, and
   MUST NOT be fragmented.

   PACSI NAL units may be used for the following purposes:

   o  To enable MANEs to decide whether to forward, process, or discard
      aggregation packets, by checking in PACSI NAL units the
      scalability information and other characteristics of the





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 35]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-36" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      aggregated NAL units, rather than looking into the aggregated NAL
      units themselves, which are defined by the video coding
      specification;

   o  To enable correct decoding order recovery in MST using the NI-C or
      NI-TC mode, with the help of the CS-DON information included in
      PACSI NAL units; and

   o  To improve resilience to packet losses, e.g., by utilizing the
      following data or information included in PACSI NAL units:
      repeated Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages,
      information regarding the start and end of layer representations,
      and the indices to layer representations of the lowest temporal
      subset.

   PACSI NAL units MAY be ignored in the NI-T mode without affecting the
   decoding order recovery process.

   When a PACSI NAL unit is present in an aggregation packet, the
   following applies.

   o  The PACSI NAL unit MUST be the first aggregated NAL unit in the
      aggregation packet.

   o  There MUST be at least one additional aggregated NAL unit in the
      aggregation packet.

   o  The RTP header fields and the payload header fields of the
      aggregation packet are set as if the PACSI NAL unit was not
      included in the aggregation packet.

   o  If the aggregation packet is an MTAP16, MTAP24, or NI-MTAP with
      the J field equal to 1, the decoding order number (DON) for the
      PACSI NAL unit MUST be set to indicate that the PACSI NAL unit has
      an identical DON to the first NAL unit in decoding order among the
      remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet.

   When a PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet, it is
   associated with the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order,
   and the RTP header fields of the packet are set as if the next non-
   PACSI NAL unit in transmission order was included in a single NAL
   unit packet.

   The PACSI NAL unit structure is as follows.  The first four octets
   are exactly the same as the four-byte SVC NAL unit header discussed
   in <a href="#section-1.1.3">Section 1.1.3</a>.  They are followed by one octet containing several
   flags, then five optional octets, and finally zero or more SEI NAL
   units.  Each SEI NAL unit is preceded by a 16-bit unsigned size field



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 36]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-37" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   (in network byte order) that indicates the size of the following NAL
   unit in bytes (excluding these two octets, but including the NAL unit
   header octet of the SEI NAL unit).  Figure 3 illustrates the PACSI
   NAL unit structure and an example of a PACSI NAL unit containing two
   SEI NAL units.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |F|NRI|  Type   |R|I|   PRID    |N| DID |  QID  | TID |U|D|O| RR|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |X|Y|T|A|P|C|S|E| TL0PICIDX (o) |        IDRPICID (o)           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          DONC (o)             |        NAL unit size 1        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                 SEI NAL unit 1                                |
   |                                                               |
   |               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               |        NAL unit size 2        |               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+               |
   |                                                               |
   |            SEI NAL unit 2                                     |
   |                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 3.  PACSI NAL unit structure.  Fields suffixed by
   "(o)" are OPTIONAL.

   The bits A, P, and C are specified only if the bit X is equal to 1.
   The bits S and E are specified, and the fields TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID
   are present, only if the bit Y is equal to 1.  The field DONC is
   present only if the bit T is equal to 1.  The field T MUST be equal
   to 0 if the PACSI NAL unit is contained in an STAP-B, MTAP16, MTAP24,
   or NI-MTAP with the J field equal to 1.

   The values of the fields in PACSI NAL unit MUST be set as follows.

   o  The F bit MUST be set to 1 if the F bit in at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the
      next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order has the F bit equal
      to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit
      packet).  Otherwise, the F bit MUST be set to 0.






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 37]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-38" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  The NRI field MUST be set to the highest value of NRI field among
      all the remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet (when the
      PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or the value
      of the NRI field of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission
      order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit
      packet).

   o  The Type field MUST be set to 30.

   o  The R bit MUST be set to 1.  Receivers MUST ignore the value of R.

   o  The I bit MUST be set to 1 if the I bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the
      I bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL
      unit packet).  Otherwise, the I bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The PRID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the PRID values
      of the remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet (when the
      PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or the PRID
      value of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).

   o  The N bit MUST be set to 1 if the N bit of all the remaining NAL
      units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL
      unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the N bit of the
      next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).
      Otherwise, the N bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The DID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the DID values of
      the remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI
      NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or the DID value of
      the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI
      NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).

   o  The QID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the QID values of
      the remaining NAL units with the lowest value of DID in the
      aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or the QID value of the next non-PACSI NAL
      unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in
      a single NAL unit packet).

   o  The TID field MUST be set to the lowest value of the TID values of
      the remaining NAL units with the lowest value of DID in the
      aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 38]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-39" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      aggregation packet) or the TID value of the next non-PACSI NAL
      unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in
      a single NAL unit packet).

   o  The U bit MUST be set to 1 if the U bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the
      U bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL
      unit packet).  Otherwise, the U bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The D bit MUST be set to 1 if the D value of all the remaining NAL
      units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL
      unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the D bit of the
      next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).
      Otherwise, the D bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The O bit MUST be set to 1 if the O bit of at least one of the
      remaining NAL units in the aggregation packet is equal to 1 (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the
      O bit of the next non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is
      equal to 1 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL
      unit packet).  Otherwise, the O bit MUST be set to 0.

   o  The RR field MUST be set to "11" (in binary form).  Receivers MUST
      ignore the value of RR.

   o  If the X bit is equal to 1, the bits A, P, and C are specified as
      below.  Otherwise, the bits A, P, and C are unspecified, and
      receivers MUST ignore the values of these bits.  The X bit SHOULD
      be identical for all the PACSI NAL units in all the RTP sessions
      carrying the same SVC bitstream.

   o  If the Y bit is equal to 1, the OPTIONAL fields TL0PICIDX and
      IDRPICID MUST be present and specified as below, and the bits S
      and E are also specified as below.  Otherwise, the fields
      TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID MUST NOT be present, while the S and E bits
      are unspecified and receivers MUST ignore the values of these
      bits.  The Y bit MUST be identical for all the PACSI NAL units in
      all the RTP sessions carrying the same SVC bitstream.  The Y bit
      MUST be equal to 0 when the parameter packetization-mode is equal
      to 2.

   o  If the T bit is equal to 1, the OPTIONAL field DONC MUST be
      present and specified as below.  Otherwise, the field DONC MUST
      NOT be present.  The field T MUST be equal to 0 if the PACSI NAL
      unit is contained in an STAP-B, MTAP16, MTAP24, or NI-MTAP.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 39]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-40" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  The A bit MUST be set to 1 if at least one of the remaining NAL
      units in the aggregation packet belongs to an anchor layer
      representation (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or if the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order belongs to an anchor layer representation (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).
      Otherwise, the A bit MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: The A bit indicates whether CGS or spatial layer
      switching at a non-IDR layer representation (a layer
      representation with nal_unit_type not equal to 5 and idr_flag not
      equal to 1) can be performed.  With some picture coding structures
      a non-IDR intra layer representation can be used for random
      access.  Compared to using only IDR layer representations, higher
      coding efficiency can be achieved.  The H.264/AVC or SVC solution
      to indicate the random accessibility of a non-IDR intra layer
      representation is using a recovery point SEI message.  The A bit
      offers direct access to this information, without having to parse
      the recovery point SEI message, which may be buried deeply in an
      SEI NAL unit.  Furthermore, the SEI message may or may not be
      present in the bitstream.

   o  The P bit MUST be set to 1 if all the remaining NAL units in the
      aggregation packet have redundant_pic_cnt greater than 0 (when the
      PACSI NAL unit is included in an aggregation packet) or the next
      non-PACSI NAL unit in transmission order has redundant_pic_cnt
      greater than 0 (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single
      NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the P bit MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: The P bit indicates whether a packet can be
      discarded because it contains only redundant slice NAL units.
      Without this bit, the corresponding information can be obtained
      from the syntax element redundant_pic_cnt, which is contained in
      the variable-length coded slice header.

   o  The C bit MUST be set to 1 if at least one of the remaining NAL
      units in the aggregation packet belongs to an intra layer
      representation (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or if the next non-PACSI NAL unit in
      transmission order belongs to an intra layer representation (when
      the PACSI NAL unit is included in a single NAL unit packet).
      Otherwise, the C bit MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: The C bit indicates whether a packet contains
      intra slices, which may be the only packets to be forwarded, e.g.,
      when the network conditions are particularly adverse.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 40]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-41" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  The S bit MUST be set to 1, if the first NAL unit following the
      PACSI NAL unit in an aggregation packet is the first VCL NAL unit,
      in decoding order, of a layer representation (when the PACSI NAL
      unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is the first VCL NAL unit, in
      decoding order, of a layer representation(when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the S bit
      MUST be set to 0.

   o  The E bit MUST be set to 1, if the last NAL unit following the
      PACSI NAL unit in an aggregation packet is the last VCL NAL unit,
      in decoding order, of a layer representation (when the PACSI NAL
      unit is included in an aggregation packet) or if the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order is the last VCL NAL unit, in
      decoding order, of a layer representation (when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in a single NAL unit packet).  Otherwise, the E bit
      MUST be set to 0.

      Informative note: In an aggregation packet it is always possible
      to detect the beginning or end of a layer representation by
      detecting changes in the values of dependency_id, quality_id, and
      temporal_id in NAL unit headers, except from the first and last
      NAL units of a packet.  The S or E bits are used to provide this
      information, for both single NAL unit and aggregation packets, so
      that previous or following packets do not have to be examined.
      This enables MANEs to detect slice loss and take proper action
      such as requesting a retransmission as soon as possible, as well
      as to allow efficient playout buffer handling similarly to the M
      bit present in the RTP header.  The M bit in the RTP header still
      indicates the end of an access unit, not the end of a layer
      representation.

   o  When present, the TL0PICIDX field MUST be set to equal to
      tl0_dep_rep_idx as specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for the layer
      representation containing the first NAL unit following the PACSI
      NAL unit in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in an aggregation packet) or containing the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).

   o  When present, the IDRPICID field MUST be set to equal to
      effective_idr_pic_id as specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for the
      layer representation containing the first NAL unit following the
      PACSI NAL unit in the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit
      is included in an aggregation packet) or containing the next non-
      PACSI NAL unit in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is
      included in a single NAL unit packet).




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 41]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-42" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      Informative note: The TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID fields enable the
      detection of the loss of layer representations in the most
      important temporal layer (with temporal_id equal to 0) by
      receivers as well as MANEs.  SVC provides a solution that uses SEI
      messages, which are harder to parse and may or may not be present
      in the bitstream.  When the PACSI NAL unit is part of an NI-MTAP
      packet, it is possible to infer the correct values of
      tl0_dep_rep_idx and idr_pic_id for all layer representations
      contained in the NI-MTAP by following the rules that specify how
      these parameters are set as given in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and by
      detecting the different layer representations contained in the NI-
      MTAP packet by detecting changes in the values of dependency_id_,
      quality_id, and temporal_id in the NAL unit headers as well as
      using the S and E flags.  The only exception is if NAL units of an
      IDR picture are present in the NI-MTAP in a position other than
      the first NAL unit following the PACSI NAL unit, in which case the
      value of idr_pic_id cannot be inferred.  In this case the NAL unit
      has to be partially parsed to obtain the idr_pic_id.  Note that,
      due to the large size of IDR pictures, their inclusion in an NI-
      MTAP, and especially in a position other than the first NAL unit
      following the PACSI NAL unit, may be neither practical nor useful.

   o  When present, the field DONC indicates the cross-session decoding
      order number (CS-DON) for the first of the remaining NAL units in
      the aggregation packet (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in an
      aggregation packet) or the CS-DON of the next non-PACSI NAL unit
      in transmission order (when the PACSI NAL unit is included in a
      single NAL unit packet).  CS-DON is further discussed in <a href="#section-4.11">Section</a>
      <a href="#section-4.11">4.11</a>.

   The PACSI NAL unit MAY include a subset of the SEI NAL units
   associated with the access unit to which the first non-PACSI NAL unit
   in the aggregation packet belongs, and MUST NOT contain SEI NAL units
   associated with any other access unit.

      Informative note:  In H.264/AVC and SVC, within each access unit,
      SEI NAL units must appear before any VCL NAL unit in decoding
      order.  Therefore, without using PACSI NAL units, SEI messages are
      typically only conveyed in the first of the packets carrying an
      access unit.  Senders may repeat SEI NAL units in PACSI NAL units,
      so that they are repeated in more than one packet and thus
      increase robustness against packet losses.  Receivers may use the
      repeated SEI messages in place of missing SEI messages.

   For a PACSI NAL unit included in an aggregation packet, an SEI
   message SHOULD NOT be included in the PACSI NAL unit and also
   included in one of the remaining NAL units contained in the same
   aggregation packet.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 42]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-43" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.10" href="#section-4.10">4.10</a>.  Empty NAL unit</span>

   An empty NAL unit MAY be included in a single NAL unit packet, an
   STAP-A or an NI-MTAP packet.  Empty NAL units MUST have an RTP
   timestamp (when transported in a single NAL unit packet) or NALU-
   time (when transported in an aggregation packet) that is associated
   with an access unit for which there exists at least one NAL unit of
   type 1, 5, or 20.  When MST is used, the type 1, 5, or 20 NAL unit
   may be in a different RTP session.  Empty NAL units may be used in
   the decoding order recovery process of the NI-T mode as described in
   <a href="#section-5.2.1">Section 5.2.1</a>.

   The packet structure is shown in the following figure.

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |F|NRI|  Type   | Subtype |J|K|L|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 4.  Empty NAL unit structure.

   The fields MUST be set as follows:

     F MUST be equal to 0
     NRI MUST be equal to 3
     Type MUST be equal to 31
     Subtype MUST be equal to 1
     J MUST be equal to 0
     K MUST be equal to 0
     L MUST be equal to 0

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.11" href="#section-4.11">4.11</a>.  Decoding Order Number (DON)</span>

   The DON concept is introduced in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] and is used to recover the
   decoding order when interleaving is used within a single session.
   <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.5">Section&nbsp;5.5 of [RFC6184]</a> applies when using SST.

   When using MST, it is necessary to recover the decoding order across
   the various RTP sessions regardless if interleaving is used or not.
   In addition to the timestamp mechanism described later, the CS-DON
   mechanism is an extension of the DON facility that can be used for
   this purpose, and is defined in the following section.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.11.1" href="#section-4.11.1">4.11.1</a>.  Cross-Session DON (CS-DON) for Multi-Session Transmission</span>

   The cross-session decoding order number (CS-DON) is a number that
   indicates the decoding order of NAL units across all RTP sessions
   involved in MST.  It is similar to the DON concept in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], but
   contrary to [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] where the DON was used only for interleaved



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 43]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-44" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   packetization, in this memo it is used not only in the interleaved
   MST mode (I-C) but also in two of the non-interleaved MST modes (NI-C
   and NI-TC).

   When the NI-C or NI-TC MST modes are in use, the packetization of
   each session MUST be as specified in <a href="#section-5.2.2">Section 5.2.2</a>.  In PACSI NAL
   units the CS-DON value is explicitly coded in the field DONC.  For
   non-PACSI NAL units the CS-DON value is derived as follows.  Let SN
   indicate the RTP sequence number of a packet.

   o  For each non-PACSI NAL unit carried in a session using the single
      NAL unit session packetization mode, the CS-DON value of the NAL
      unit is equal to (DONC_prev_PACSI + SN_diff - 1) % 65536, wherein
      "%" is the modulo operation, DONC_prev_PACSI is the DONC value of
      the previous PACSI NAL unit with the same NALU-time as the current
      NAL unit, and SN_diff is calculated as follows:

         if SN1 &gt; SN2, SN_diff = SN1 - SN2
         else SN_diff = SN2 + 65536 - SN1

      where SN1 and SN2 are the SNs of the current NAL unit and the
      previous PACSI NAL unit with the same NALU-time, respectively.

   o  For non-PACSI NAL units carried in a session using the non-
      interleaved session packetization mode, the CS-DON value of each
      non-PACSI NAL unit is derived as follows.

         For a non-PACSI NAL unit in a single NAL unit packet, the
         following applies.

            If the previous PACSI NAL unit is contained in a single NAL
            unit packet, the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is calculated
            as above;

            otherwise (the previous PACSI NAL unit is contained in an
            STAP-A packet), the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is
            calculated as above, with DONC_prev_PACSI being replaced by
            the CS-DON value of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in
            decoding order (i.e., the CS-DON value of the last NAL unit
            of the STAP-A packet).

         For a non-PACSI NAL unit in an STAP-A packet, the following
         applies.

            If the non-PACSI NAL unit is the first non-PACSI NAL unit in
            the STAP-A packet, the CS-DON value of the NAL unit is equal
            to DONC of the PACSI NAL unit in the STAP-A packet;




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 44]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-45" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


            otherwise (the non-PACSI NAL unit is not the first non-
            PACSI NAL unit in the STAP-A packet), the CS-DON value of
            the NAL unit is equal to: (the CS-DON value of the previous
            non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding order + 1) % 65536, wherein
            "%" is the modulo operation.

         For a non-PACSI NAL unit in a number of FU-A packets, the CS-
         DON value of the NAL unit is calculated the same way as when
         the single NAL unit session packetization mode is in use, with
         SN1 being the SN value of the first FU-A packet.

         For a non-PACSI NAL unit in an NI-MTAP packet, the CS-DON value
         is equal to the value of the DON field of the non-interleaved
         multi-time aggregation unit.

   When the I-C MST packetization mode is in use, the DON values derived
   according to [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] for all the NAL units in each of the RTP
   sessions MUST indicate CS-DON values.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>.  Packetization Rules</span>

   <a href="./rfc6184#section-6">Section&nbsp;6 of [RFC6184]</a> applies in this memo, with the following
   additions.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.1" href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>.  Packetization Rules for Single-Session Transmission</span>

   All receivers MUST support the single NAL unit packetization mode to
   provide backward compatibility to endpoints supporting only the
   single NAL unit mode of [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  However, the use of single NAL
   unit packetization mode (packetization-mode equal to 0) SHOULD be
   avoided whenever possible, because encapsulating NAL units of small
   sizes in their own packets (e.g., small NAL units containing
   parameter sets, prefix NAL units, or SEI messages) is less efficient
   due to the packet header overhead.

   All receivers MUST support the non-interleaved mode.

      Informative note: The non-interleaved mode of [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] does allow
      an application to encapsulate a single NAL unit in a single RTP
      packet.  Historically, the single NAL unit mode has been included
      in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] only for compatibility with ITU-T Rec. H.241 Annex A
      [<a href="#ref-H.241" title="&quot;Extended video procedures and control signals for H.300-series terminals&quot;">H.241</a>].  There is no point in carrying this historic ballast
      towards a new application space such as the one provided with SVC.
      The implementation complexity increase for supporting the
      additional mechanisms of the non-interleaved mode (namely, STAP-A
      and FU-A) is minor, whereas the benefits are significant.  As a
      result, the support of STAP-A and FU-A is required.  Additionally,




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 45]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-46" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      support for two of the three NAL unit types defined in this memo,
      namely, empty NAL units and NI-MTAP is needed, as specified in
      <a href="#section-4.5.1">Section 4.5.1</a>.

   A NAL unit of small size SHOULD be encapsulated in an aggregation
   packet together with one or more other NAL units.  For example, non-
   VCL NAL units such as access unit delimiters, parameter sets, or SEI
   NAL units are typically small.

   A prefix NAL unit and the NAL unit with which it is associated, and
   which follows the prefix NAL unit in decoding order, SHOULD be
   included in the same aggregation packet whenever an aggregation
   packet is used for the associated NAL unit, unless this would violate
   session MTU constraints or if fragmentation units are used for the
   associated NAL unit.

      Informative note: Although the prefix NAL unit is ignored by an
      H.264/AVC decoder, it is necessary in the SVC decoding process.

      Given the small size of the prefix NAL unit, it is best if it is
      transported in the same RTP packet as its associated NAL unit.

   When only an H.264/AVC compatible subset of the SVC base layer is
   transmitted in an RTP session, the subset MUST be encapsulated
   according to [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  This way, an [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] receiver will be able
   to receive the H.264/AVC compatible bitstream subset.

   When a set of layers including one or more SVC enhancement layers is
   transmitted in an RTP session, the set SHOULD be carried in one RTP
   stream that SHOULD be encapsulated according to this memo.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2" href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>.  Packetization Rules for Multi-Session Transmission</span>

   When MST is used, the packetization rules specified in <a href="#section-5.1">Section 5.1</a>
   still apply.  In addition, the following packetization rules MUST be
   followed, to ensure that decoding order of NAL units carried in the
   sessions can be correctly recovered for each of the MST packetization
   modes using the de-packetization process specified in <a href="#section-6.2">Section 6.2</a>.

   The NI-T and NI-TC modes both use timestamps to recover the decoding
   order.  In order to be able to do so, it is necessary for the RTP
   packet stream to contain data for all sampling instances of a given
   RTP session in all enhancement RTP sessions that depend on the given
   RTP session.  The NI-C and I-C modes do not have this limitation, and
   use the CS-DON values as a means to explicitly indicate decoding
   order, either directly coded in PACSI NAL units, or inferred from





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 46]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-47" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   them using the packetization rules.  It is noted that the NI-TC mode
   offers both alternatives and it is up to the receiver to select which
   one to use.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2.1" href="#section-5.2.1">5.2.1</a>.  NI-T/NI-TC Packetization Rules</span>

   When using the NI-T mode and a PACSI NAL unit is present, the T bit
   MUST be equal to 0, i.e., the DONC field MUST NOT be present.

   When using the NI-T mode, the optional parameters sprop-mst-remux-
   buf-size, sprop-remux-buf-req, remux-buf-cap, sprop-remux-init-buf-
   time, sprop-mst-max-don-diff MUST NOT be present.

   When the NI-T or NI-TC MST mode is in use, the following applies.

   If one or more NAL units of an access unit of sampling time instance
   t is present in RTP session A, then one or more NAL units of the same
   access unit MUST be present in any enhancement RTP session that
   depends on RTP session A.

      Informative note: The mapping between RTP and NTP format
      timestamps is conveyed in RTCP SR packets.  In addition, the
      mechanisms for faster media timestamp synchronization discussed in
      [<a href="./rfc6051" title="&quot;Rapid Synchronisation of RTP Flows&quot;">RFC6051</a>] may be used to speed up the acquisition of the RTP-to-
      wall-clock mapping.

      Informative note: The rule above may require the insertion of NAL
      units, typically when temporal scalability is used, i.e., an
      enhancement RTP session does not contain any NAL units for an
      access unit with a particular NTP timestamp (media timestamp),
      which, however, is present in a lower enhancement RTP session or
      the base RTP session.  There are two ways to insert additional NAL
      units in order to satisfy this rule:

      - One option for adding additional NAL units is to use empty NAL
        units (defined in <a href="#section-4.10">Section 4.10</a>), which can be used by the
        process described in <a href="#section-6.2.1">Section 6.2.1</a> for the access unit
        reordering process.

      - Additional NAL units may also be added by the encoder itself,
        for example, by transmitting coded data that simply instruct the
        decoder to repeat the previous picture.  This option, however,
        may be difficult to use with pre-encoded content.

   If a packet must be inserted in order to satisfy the above rule,
   e.g., in case of a MANE generating multiple RTP streams out of a
   single RTP stream, the inserted packet must have an RTP timestamp
   that maps to the same wall-clock time (in NTP format) as the one of



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 47]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-48" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   the RTP timestamp of any packet of the access unit present in any
   lower enhancement RTP session or the base RTP session.  This is easy
   to accomplish if the NAL unit or the packet can be inserted at the
   time of the RTP stream generation, since the media timestamp (NTP
   timestamp) must be the same for the inserted packet and the packet of
   the corresponding access unit.  If there is no knowledge of the media
   time at RTP stream generation or if the RTP streams are not generated
   at the same instance, this can be also applied later in the
   transmission process.  In this case the NTP timestamp of the inserted
   packet can be calculated as follows.

   Assume that a packet A2 of an access unit with RTP timestamp TS_A2 is
   present in base RTP session A, and that no packet of that access unit
   is present in enhancement RTP session B, as shown in Figure 5.  Thus,
   a packet B2 must be inserted into session B following the rule above.
   The most recent RTCP sender report in session A carries NTP timestamp
   NTP_A and the RTP timestamp TS_A.  The sender report in session B
   with a lower NTP timestamp than NTP_A is NTP_B, and carries the RTP
   timestamp TS_B.

     RTP  session B:..B0........B1........(B2)......................

     RTCP session B:.....SR(NTP_B,TS_B).............................

     RTP  session A:..A0........A1........A2........................

     RTCP session A:..................SR(NTP_A,TS_A)................

     -----------------|--x------|-----x---|------------------------&gt;
                                                              NTP time
     --------------------+&lt;----------&gt;+&lt;-&gt;+------------------------&gt;
                               t1       t2              RTP TS(B) time

   Figure 5.  Example calculation of RTP timestamp for packet
   insertion in an enhancement layer RTP session

   The vertical bars ("|")in the NTP time line in the figure above
   indicate that access unit data is present in at least one of the
   sessions.  The "x" marks indicate the times of the sender reports.
   The RTP timestamp time line for session B, shown right below the NTP
   time line, indicates two time segments, t1 and t2. t1 is the time
   difference between the sender reports between the two sessions,
   expressed in RTP timestamp clock ticks, and t2 is the time difference
   from the session A sender report to the A2 packet, again expressed in
   RTP timestamp clock ticks.  The sum of these differences is added to






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 48]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-49" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   the RTP timestamp of the session report from session B in order to
   derive the correct RTP timestamp for the inserted packet B2.  In
   other words:

     TS_B2 = TS_B + t1 + t2

   Let toRTP() be a function that calculates the RTP time difference (in
   clock ticks of the used clock) given an NTP timestamp difference, and
   effRTPdiff() be a function that calculates the effective difference
   between two timestamps, including wraparounds:

     effRTPdiff( ts1, ts2 ):

         if( ts1 &lt;= ts2 ) then
             effRTPdiff := ts1-ts2
         else
             effRTPDiff := (4294967296 + ts2) - ts1
   We have:

     t1 = toRTP(NTP_A - NTP_B) and t2 = effRTPdiff(TS_A2, TS_A)

   Hence in order to generate the RTP timestamp TS_B2 for the inserted
   packet B2, the RTP timestamp for packet B2 TS_B2 can be calculated as
   follows.

     TS_B2 =  TS_B + toRTP(NTP_A - NTP_B) +  effRTPdiff(TS_A2, TS_A)

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2.2" href="#section-5.2.2">5.2.2</a>.  NI-C/NI-TC Packetization Rules</span>

   When the NI-C or NI-TC MST mode is in use, the following applies for
   each of the RTP sessions.

   o  For each single NAL unit packet containing a non-PACSI NAL unit,
      the previous packet, if present, MUST have the same RTP timestamp
      as the single NAL unit packet, and the following applies.

      o  If the NALU-time of the non-PACSI NAL unit is not equal to the
         NALU-time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding order,
         the previous packet MUST contain a PACSI NAL unit containing
         the DONC field.

   o  In an STAP-A packet the first NAL unit in the STAP-A packet MUST
      be a PACSI NAL unit containing the DONC field.

   o  For an FU-A packet the previous packet MUST have the same RTP
      timestamp as the FU-A packet, and the following applies.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 49]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-50" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      o If the FU-A packet is the start of the fragmented NAL unit, the
         following applies.

         o  If the NALU-time of the fragmented NAL unit is not equal to
            the NALU-time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding
            order, the previous packet MUST contain a PACSI NAL unit
            containing the DONC field;

         o  Otherwise, (the NALU-time of the fragmented NAL unit is
            equal to the NALU-time of the previous non-PACSI NAL unit in
            decoding order), the previous packet MAY contain a PACSI NAL
            unit containing the DONC field.

      o  Otherwise, if the FU-A packet is the end of the fragmented NAL
         unit, the following applies.

         o  If the next non-PACSI NAL unit in decoding order has NALU-
            time equal to the NALU-time of the fragmented NAL unit, and
            is carried in a number of FU-A packets or a single NAL unit
            packet, the next packet MUST be a single NAL unit packet
            containing a PACSI NAL unit containing the DONC field.

         o  Otherwise (the FU-A packet is neither the start nor the end
            of the fragmented NAL unit), the previous packet MUST be a
            FU-A packet.

   o  For each single NAL unit packet containing a PACSI NAL unit, if
      present, the PACSI NAL unit MUST contain the DONC field.

   o  When the optional media type parameter sprop-mst-csdon-always-
      present is equal to 1, the session packetization mode in use MUST
      be the non-interleaved mode, and only STAP-A and NI-MTAP packets
      can be used.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2.3" href="#section-5.2.3">5.2.3</a>.  I-C Packetization Rules</span>

   When the I-C MST packetization mode is in use, the following applies.

   o  When a PACSI NAL unit is present, the T bit MUST be equal to 0,
      i.e., the DONC field is not present, and the Y bit MUST be equal
      to 0, i.e., the TL0PICIDX and IDRPICID are not present.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2.4" href="#section-5.2.4">5.2.4</a>.  Packetization Rules for Non-VCL NAL Units</span>

   NAL units that do not directly encode video slices are known in H.264
   as non-VCL NAL units.  Non-VCL units that are only used by, or only
   relevant to, enhancement RTP sessions SHOULD be sent in the lowest
   session to which they are relevant.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 50]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-51" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Some senders, however, such as those sending pre-encoded data, may be
   unable to easily determine which non-VCL units are relevant to which
   session.  Thus, non-VCL NAL units MAY, instead, be sent in a session
   on which the session using these non-VCL NAL units depends (e.g., the
   base RTP session).

   If a non-VCL unit is relevant to more than one RTP session, neither
   of which depends on the other(s), the NAL unit MAY be sent in another
   session on which all these sessions depend.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2.5" href="#section-5.2.5">5.2.5</a>.  Packetization Rules for Prefix NAL Units</span>

   <a href="#section-5.1">Section 5.1</a> of this memo applies, with the following addition.  If
   the base layer is sent in a base RTP session using [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], prefix
   NAL units MAY be sent in the lowest enhancement RTP session rather
   than in the base RTP session.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>.  De-Packetization Process</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.1" href="#section-6.1">6.1</a>.  De-Packetization Process for Single-Session Transmission</span>

   For single-session transmission, where a single RTP session is used,
   the de-packetization process specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-7">Section&nbsp;7 of [RFC6184]</a>
   applies.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2" href="#section-6.2">6.2</a>.  De-Packetization Process for Multi-Session Transmission</span>

   For multi-session transmission, where more than one RTP session is
   used to receive data from the same SVC bitstream, the de-
   packetization process is specified as follows.

   As for a single RTP session, the general concept behind the de-
   packetization process is to reorder NAL units from transmission order
   to the NAL unit decoding order.

   The sessions to be received MUST be identified by mechanisms
   specified in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a>.  An enhancement RTP session typically
   contains an RTP stream that depends on at least one other RTP
   session, as indicated by mechanisms defined in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a>.  A
   lower RTP session to an enhancement RTP session is an RTP session on
   which the enhancement RTP session depends.  The lowest RTP session
   for a receiver is the base RTP session, which does not depend on any
   other RTP session received by the receiver.  The highest RTP session
   for a receiver is the RTP session on which no other RTP session
   received by the receiver depends.






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 51]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-52" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   For each of the RTP sessions, the RTP reception process as specified
   in <a href="./rfc3550">RFC 3550</a> is applied.  Then the received packets are passed into
   the payload de-packetization process as defined in this memo.

   The decoding order of the NAL units carried in all the associated RTP
   sessions is then recovered by applying one of the following
   subsections, depending on which of the MST packetization modes is in
   use.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2.1" href="#section-6.2.1">6.2.1</a>.  Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-T and NI-TC Modes</span>

   The following process MUST be applied when the NI-T packetization
   mode is in use.  The following process MAY be applied when the NI-TC
   packetization mode is in use.

   The process is based on RTP session dependency signaling, RTP
   sequence numbers, and timestamps.

   The decoding order of NAL units within an RTP packet stream in RTP
   session is given by the ordering of sequence numbers SN of the RTP
   packets that contain the NAL units, and the order of appearance of
   NAL units within a packet.

   Timing information according to the media timestamp TS, i.e., the NTP
   timestamp as derived from the RTP timestamp of an RTP packet, is
   associated with all NAL units contained in the same RTP packet
   received in an RTP session.

   For NI-MTAP packets the NALU-time is derived for each contained NAL
   unit by using the "TS offset" value in the NI-MTAP packet as defined
   in <a href="#section-4.10">Section 4.10</a>, and is used instead of the RTP packet timestamp to
   derive the media timestamp, e.g., using the NTP wall clock as
   provided via RTCP sender reports.  NAL units contained in
   fragmentation packets are handled as defragmented, entire NAL units
   with their own media timestamps.  All NAL units associated with the
   same value of media timestamp TS are part of the same access unit
   AU(TS).  Any empty NAL units SHOULD be kept as, effectively, access
   unit indicators in the reordering process.  Empty NAL units and PACSI
   NAL units SHOULD be removed before passing access unit data to the
   decoder.

      Informative note: These empty NAL units are used to associate NAL
      units present in other RTP sessions with RTP sessions not
      containing any data for an access unit of a particular time
      instance.  They act as access unit indicators in sessions that
      would otherwise contain no data for the particular access unit.
      The presence of these NAL units is ensured by the packetization
      rules in <a href="#section-5.2.1">Section 5.2.1</a>.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 52]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-53" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   It is assumed that the receiver has established an operation point
   (DID, QID, and TID values), and has identified the highest
   enhancement RTP session for this operation point.  The decoding order
   of NAL units from multiple RTP streams in multiple RTP sessions MUST
   be recovered into a single sequence of NAL units, grouped into access
   units, by performing any process equivalent to the following steps.
   The general process is described in <a href="./rfc6051#section-4.2">Section&nbsp;4.2 of [RFC6051]</a>.  For
   convenience the instructions of [<a href="./rfc6051" title="&quot;Rapid Synchronisation of RTP Flows&quot;">RFC6051</a>] are repeated and applied to
   NAL units rather than to full RTP packets.  Additionally, SVC-
   specific extensions to the procedure in <a href="./rfc6051#section-4.2">Section&nbsp;4.2.  of [RFC6051]</a>
   are presented in the following list:

      o  The process should be started with the NAL units received in
         the highest RTP session with the first media timestamp TS (in
         NTP format) available in the session's (de-jittering) buffer.
         It is assumed that packets in the de-jittering buffer are
         already stored in RTP sequence number order.

      o  Collect all NAL units associated with the same value of media
         timestamp TS, starting from the highest RTP session, from all
         the (de-jittering) buffers of the received RTP sessions.  The
         collected NAL units will be those associated with the access
         unit AU(TS).

      o  Place the collected NAL units in the order of session
         dependency as derived by the dependency indication as specified
         in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a>, starting from the lowest RTP session.

      o  Place the session ordered NAL units in decoding order within
         the particular access unit by satisfying the NAL unit ordering
         rules for SVC access units, as described in the informative
         algorithm provided in <a href="#section-6.2.1.1">Section 6.2.1.1</a>.

      o  Remove NI-MTAP and any PACSI NAL units from the access unit
         AU(TS).

      o  The access units can then be transferred to the decoder.
         Access units AU(TS) are transferred to the decoder in the order
         of appearance (given by the order of RTP sequence numbers) of
         media timestamp values TS in the highest RTP session associated
         with access unit AU(TS).

            Informative note: Due to packet loss it is possible that not
            all sessions may have NAL units present for the media
            timestamp value TS present in the highest RTP session.  In
            such a case, an algorithm may: a) proceed to the next
            complete access unit with NAL units present in all the
            received RTP sessions; or b) consider a new highest RTP



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 53]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-54" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


            session, the highest RTP session for which the access unit
            is complete, and apply the process above.  The algorithm may
            return to the original highest RTP session when a complete
            and error-free access unit that contains NAL units in all
            the sessions is received.

   The following gives an informative example.

   The example shown in Figure 6 refers to three RTP sessions A, B, and
   C containing an SVC bitstream transmitted as 3 sources.  In the
   example, the dependency signaling (described in <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a>)
   indicates that session A is the base RTP session, B is the first
   enhancement RTP session and depends on A, and C is the second
   enhancement RTP session and depends on A and B.  A hierarchical
   picture coding prediction structure is used, in which session A has
   the lowest frame rate and sessions B and C have the same but higher
   frame rate.

   The figure shows NAL units contained in RTP packets that are stored
   in the de-jittering buffer at the receiver for session de-
   packetization.  The NAL units are already reordered according to
   their RTP sequence number order and, if within an aggregation packet,
   according to the order of their appearance within the aggregation
   packet.  The figure indicates for the received NAL units the decoding
   order within the sessions, as well as the associated media (NTP)
   timestamps ("TS[..]").  NAL units of the same access unit within a
   session are grouped by "(.,.)" and share the same media timestamp TS,
   which is shown at the bottom of the figure.  Note that the timestamps
   are not in increasing order since, in this example, the decoding
   order is different from the output/display order.

   The process first proceeds to the NAL units associated with the first
   media timestamp TS[1] present in the highest session C and
   removes/ignores all preceding (in decoding order) NAL units to NAL
   units with TS[1] in each of the de-jittering buffers of RTP sessions
   A, B, and C.  Then, starting from session C, the first media
   timestamp available in decoding order (TS[1]) is selected and NAL
   units starting from RTP session A, and sessions B and C are placed in
   order of the RTP session dependency as required by <a href="#section-7.2.3">Section 7.2.3</a> of
   this memo (in the example for TS[1]: first session B and then session
   C) into the access unit AU(TS[1]) associated with media timestamp
   TS[1].  Then the next media timestamp TS[3] in order of appearance in
   the highest RTP session C is processed and the process described
   above is repeated.  Note that there may be access units with no NAL
   units present, e.g., in the lowest RTP session A (see, e.g., TS[1]).
   With TS[8], the first access unit with NAL units present in all the
   RTP sessions appears in the buffers.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 54]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-55" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   C: ------------(1,2)-(3,4)--(5)---(6)---(7,8)(9,10)-(11)--(12)----
        |     |     |     |     |     |      |    |     |      |
   B: -(1,2)-(3,4)-(5)---(6)--(7,8)-(9,10)-(11)-(12)--(13,14)(15,15)-
        |     |                 |     |                 |      |
   A: -------(1)---------------(2)---(3)---------------(4)----(5)----
   ---------------------------------------------------decoding order--&gt;

   TS: [4]   [2]   [1]   [3]   [8]   [6]   [5]   [7]   [12]   [10]

   Key:
   A, B, C                - RTP sessions
   Integer values in "()" - NAL unit decoding order within RTP session
   "( )"                  - groups the NAL units of an access unit
                            in an RTP session
   "|"                    - indicates corresponding NAL units of the
                            same access unit AU(TS[..]) in the RTP
                            sessions
   Integer values in "[]" - media timestamp TS, sampling time
                            as derived, e.g., from NTP timestamp
                            associated with the access unit AU(TS[..]),
                            consisting of NAL units in the sessions
                            above each TS value.

   Figure 6.  Example of decoding order recovery in multi-source
   transmission.

<span class="h5"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2.1.1" href="#section-6.2.1.1">6.2.1.1</a>.  Informative Algorithm for NI-T Decoding Order Recovery within</span>
<span class="h5">          an Access Unit</span>

   Within an access unit, the [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] specification (Sections <a href="#section-7.4.1.2.3">7.4.1.2.3</a>
   and G.7.4.1.2.3) constrains the valid decoding order of NAL units.

   These constraints make it possible to reconstruct a valid decoding
   order for the NAL units of an access unit based only on the order of
   NAL units in each session, the NAL unit headers, and Supplemental
   Enhancement Information message headers.

   This section specifies an informative algorithm to reconstruct a
   valid decoding order for NAL units within an access unit.  Other NAL
   unit orderings may also be valid; however, any compliant NAL unit
   ordering will describe the same video stream and ancillary data as
   the one produced by this algorithm.

   An actual implementation, of course, needs only to behave "as if"
   this reordering is done.  In particular, NAL units that are discarded
   by an implementation's decoding process do not need to be reordered.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 55]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-56" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   In this algorithm, NAL units within an access unit are first ordered
   by NAL unit type, in the order specified in Table 12 below, except
   from NAL unit type 14, which is handled specially as described in the
   table.  NAL units of the same type are then ordered as specified for
   the type, if necessary.

   For the purposes of this algorithm, "session order" is the order of
   NAL units implied by their transmission order within an RTP session.
   For the non-interleaved and single NAL unit modes, this is the RTP
   sequence number order coupled with the order of NAL units within an
   aggregation unit.

   Table 12.  Ordering of NAL unit types within an Access Unit

    Type    Description / Comments
   -----------------------------------------------------------
     9      Access unit delimiter

     7      Sequence parameter set

     13     Sequence parameter set extension

     15     Subset sequence parameter set

     8      Picture parameter set

     16-18  Reserved

     6      Supplemental enhancement information (SEI)
            If an SEI message with a first payload of 0 (Buffering
            Period) is present, it must be the first SEI message.

            If SEI messages with a Scalable Nesting (30) payload and
            a nested payload of 0 (Buffering Period) are present,
            these then follow the first SEI message.  Such an SEI
            message with the all_layer_representations_in_au_flag
            equal to 1 is placed first, followed by any others,
            sorted in increasing order of DQId.

            All other SEI messages follow in any order.

     14     Prefix NAL unit in scalable extension
     1      Coded slice of a non-IDR picture
     5      Coded slice of an IDR picture







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 56]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-57" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


            NAL units of type 1 or 5 will be sent within only a
            single session for any given access unit.  They are
            placed in session order.  (Note: Any given access unit
            will contain only NAL units of type 1 or type 5, not
            both.)

            If NAL units of type 14 are present, every NAL unit of
            type 1 or 5 is prefixed by a NAL unit of type 14.  (Note:
            Within an access unit, every NAL unit of type 14 is
            identical, so correlation of type 14 NAL units with the
            other NAL units is not necessary.)

     12     Filler data

            The only restriction of filler data NAL units within an
            access unit is that they shall not precede the first VCL
            NAL unit with the same access unit.

     19     Coded slice of an auxiliary coded picture without
            partitioning

            These NAL units will be sent within only a single
            session for any given access unit, and are placed in
            session order.

      20    Coded slice in scalable extension
      21-23 Reserved

            Type 20 NAL units are placed in increasing order of DQId.
            Within each DQId value, they are placed in session order.

            (Note: SVC slices with a given DQId value will be sent
            within only a single session for any given access unit.)

            Type 21-23 NAL units are placed immediately following
            the non-reserved-type VCL NAL unit they follow in
            session order.

     10     End of sequence

     11     End of stream

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2.2" href="#section-6.2.2">6.2.2</a>.  Decoding Order Recovery for the NI-C, NI-TC, and I-C Modes</span>

   The following process MUST be used when either the NI-C or I-C MST
   packetization mode is in use.  The following process MAY be applied
   when the NI-TC MST packetization mode is in use.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 57]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-58" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   The RTP packets output from the RTP-level reception processing for
   each session are placed into a re-multiplexing buffer.

   It is RECOMMENDED to set the size of the re-multiplexing buffer (in
   bytes) equal to or greater than the value of the sprop-remux-buf-req
   media type parameter of the highest RTP session the receiver
   receives.

   The CS-DON value is calculated and stored for each NAL unit.

      Informative note: The CS-DON value of a NAL unit may rely on
      information carried in another packet than the packet containing
      the NAL unit.  This happens, e.g., when the CS-DON values need to
      be derived for non-PACSI NAL units contained in single NAL unit
      packets, as the single NAL unit packets themselves do not contain
      CS-DON information.  In this case, when no packet containing
      required CS-DON information is received for a NAL unit, this NAL
      unit has to be discarded by the receiver as it cannot be fed to
      the decoder in the correct order.  When the optional media type
      parameter sprop-mst-csdon-always-present is equal to 1, no such
      dependency exists, i.e., the CS-DON value of any particular NAL
      unit can be derived solely according to information in the packet
      containing the NAL unit, and therefore, the receiver does not need
      to discard any received NAL units.

   The receiver operation is described below with the help of the
   following functions and constants:

   o  Function AbsDON is specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-8.1">Section&nbsp;8.1 of [RFC6184]</a>.

   o  Function don_diff is specified in <a href="./rfc6184#section-5.5">Section&nbsp;5.5 of [RFC6184]</a>.

   o  Constant N is the value of the OPTIONAL sprop-mst-remux-buf-size
      media type parameter of the highest RTP session incremented by 1.

   Initial buffering lasts until one of the following conditions is
   fulfilled:

   o  There are N or more VCL NAL units in the re-multiplexing buffer.

   o  If sprop-mst-max-don-diff of the highest RTP session is present,
      don_diff(m,n) is greater than the value of sprop-mst-max-don-diff
      of the highest RTP session, where n corresponds to the NAL unit
      having the greatest value of AbsDON among the received NAL units
      and m corresponds to the NAL unit having the smallest value of
      AbsDON among the received NAL units.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 58]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-59" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   o  Initial buffering has lasted for the duration equal to or greater
      than the value of the OPTIONAL sprop-remux-init-buf-time media
      type parameter of the highest RTP session.

   The NAL units to be removed from the re-multiplexing buffer are
   determined as follows:

   o  If the re-multiplexing buffer contains at least N VCL NAL units,
      NAL units are removed from the re-multiplexing buffer and passed
      to the decoder in the order specified below until the buffer
      contains N-1 VCL NAL units.

   o  If sprop-mst-max-don-diff of the highest RTP session is present,
      all NAL units m for which don_diff(m,n) is greater than sprop-
      max-don-diff of the highest RTP session are removed from the re-
      multiplexing buffer and passed to the decoder in the order
      specified below.  Herein, n corresponds to the NAL unit having the
      greatest value of AbsDON among the NAL units in the re-
      multiplexing buffer.

   The order in which NAL units are passed to the decoder is specified
   as follows:

   o  Let PDON be a variable that is initialized to 0 at the beginning
      of the RTP sessions.

   o  For each NAL unit associated with a value of CS-DON, a CS-DON
      distance is calculated as follows.  If the value of CS-DON of the
      NAL unit is larger than the value of PDON, the CS-DON distance is
      equal to CS-DON - PDON.  Otherwise, the CS-DON distance is equal
      to 65535 - PDON + CS-DON + 1.

   o  NAL units are delivered to the decoder in increasing order of CS-
      DON distance.  If several NAL units share the same value of CS-
      DON distance, they can be passed to the decoder in any order.

   o  When a desired number of NAL units have been passed to the
      decoder, the value of PDON is set to the value of CS-DON for the
      last NAL unit passed to the decoder.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>.  Payload Format Parameters</span>

   This section specifies the parameters that MAY be used to select
   optional features of the payload format and certain features of the
   bitstream.  The parameters are specified here as part of the media
   type registration for the SVC codec.  A mapping of the parameters
   into the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [<a href="./rfc4566" title="&quot;SDP: Session Description Protocol&quot;">RFC4566</a>] is also




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 59]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-60" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   provided for applications that use SDP.  Equivalent parameters could
   be defined elsewhere for use with control protocols that do not use
   SDP.

   Some parameters provide a receiver with the properties of the stream
   that will be sent.  The names of all these parameters start with
   "sprop" for stream properties.  Some of these "sprop" parameters are
   limited by other payload or codec configuration parameters.  For
   example, the sprop-parameter-sets parameter is constrained by the
   profile-level-id parameter.  The media sender selects all "sprop"
   parameters rather than the receiver.  This uncommon characteristic of
   the "sprop" parameters may be incompatible with some signaling
   protocol concepts, in which case the use of these parameters SHOULD
   be avoided.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.1" href="#section-7.1">7.1</a>.  Media Type Registration</span>

   The media subtype for the SVC codec has been allocated from the IETF
   tree.

   The receiver MUST ignore any unspecified parameter.

      Informative note: Requiring that the receiver ignore unspecified
      parameters allows for backward compatibility of future extensions.
      For example, if a future specification that is backward compatible
      to this specification specifies some new parameters, then a
      receiver according to this specification is capable of receiving
      data per the new payload but ignoring those parameters newly
      specified in the new payload specification.  This provision is
      also present in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

   Media Type name:     video

   Media subtype name:  H264-SVC

   Required parameters: none

   OPTIONAL parameters:

      In the following definitions of parameters, "the stream" or "the
      NAL unit stream" refers to all NAL units conveyed in the current
      RTP session in SST, and all NAL units conveyed in the current RTP
      session and all NAL units conveyed in other RTP sessions that the
      current RTP session depends on in MST.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 60]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-61" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      profile-level-id:
         A base16 [<a href="./rfc4648" title="&quot;The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings&quot;">RFC4648</a>] (hexadecimal) representation of the
         following three bytes in the sequence parameter set or subset
         sequence parameter set NAL unit specified in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]: 1)
         profile_idc; 2) a byte herein referred to as profile-iop,
         composed of the values of constraint_set0_flag,
         constraint_set1_flag, constraint_set2_flag,
         constraint_set3_flag, constraint_set4_flag,
         constraint_set5_flag, and reserved_zero_2bits, in bit-
         significance order, starting from the most-significant bit, and
         3) level_idc.  Note that reserved_zero_2bits is required to be
         equal to 0 in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], but other values for it may be specified
         in the future by ITU-T or ISO/IEC.

         The profile-level-id parameter indicates the default sub-
         profile, i.e., the subset of coding tools that may have been
         used to generate the stream or that the receiver supports, and
         the default level of the stream or the one that the receiver
         supports.

         The default sub-profile is indicated collectively by the
         profile_idc byte and some fields in the profile-iop byte.
         Depending on the values of the fields in the profile-iop byte,
         the default sub-profile may be the same set of coding tools
         supported by one profile, or a common subset of coding tools of
         multiple profiles, as specified in Subsection G.7.4.2.1.1 of
         [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  The default level is indicated by the level_idc byte,
         and, when profile_idc is equal to 66, 77, or 88 (the Baseline,
         Main, or Extended profile) and level_idc is equal to 11,
         additionally by bit 4 (constraint_set3_flag) of the profile-iop
         byte.  When profile_idc is equal to 66, 77, or 88 (the
         Baseline, Main, or Extended profile) and level_idc is equal to
         11, and bit 4 (constraint_set3_flag) of the profile-iop byte is
         equal to 1, the default level is Level 1b.

         Table 13 lists all profiles defined in Annexes A and G of
         [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] and, for each of the profiles, the possible
         combinations of profile_idc and profile-iop that represent the
         same sub-profile.

         Table 13.  Combinations of profile_idc and profile-iop
         representing the same sub-profile corresponding to the full set
         of coding tools supported by one profile.  In the following, x
         may be either 0 or 1, while the profile names are indicated as
         follows.  CB: Constrained Baseline profile, B: Baseline
         profile, M: Main profile, E: Extended profile, H: High profile,
         H10: High 10 profile, H42: High 4:2:2 profile, H44: High 4:4:4
         Predictive profile, H10I: High 10 Intra profile, H42I: High



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 61]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-62" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         4:2:2 Intra profile, H44I: High 4:4:4 Intra profile, C44I:
         CAVLC 4:4:4 Intra profile, SB: Scalable Baseline profile, SH:
         Scalable High profile, and SHI: Scalable High Intra profile.

         Profile     profile_idc             profile-iop
                         (hexadecimal)           (binary)

             CB          42 (B)                  x1xx0000
               same as:  4D (M)                  1xxx0000
               same as:  58 (E)                  11xx0000
             B           42 (B)                  x0xx0000
               same as:  58 (E)                  10xx0000
             M           4D (M)                  0x0x0000
             E           58                      00xx0000
             H           64                      00000000
             H10         6E                      00000000
             H42         7A                      00000000
             H44         F4                      00000000
             H10I        6E                      00010000
             H42I        7A                      00010000
             H44I        F4                      00010000
             C44I        2C                      00010000
             SB          53                      x0000000
             SH          56                      0x000000
             SHI         56                      0x010000

         For example, in the table above, profile_idc equal to 58
         (Extended) with profile-iop equal to 11xx0000 indicates the
         same sub-profile corresponding to profile_idc equal to 42
         (Baseline) with profile-iop equal to x1xx0000.  Note that other
         combinations of profile_idc and profile-iop (not listed in
         Table 13) may represent a sub-profile equivalent to the common
         subset of coding tools for more than one profile.  Note also
         that a decoder conforming to a certain profile may be able to
         decode bitstreams conforming to other profiles.

         If profile-level-id is used to indicate stream properties, it
         indicates that, to decode the stream, the minimum subset of
         coding tools a decoder has to support is the default sub-
         profile, and the lowest level the decoder has to support is the
         default level.

         If the profile-level-id parameter is used for capability
         exchange or session setup, it indicates the subset of coding
         tools, which is equal to the default sub-profile, that the
         codec supports for both receiving and sending.  If max-recv-
         level is not present, the default level from profile-level-id
         indicates the highest level the codec wishes to support.  If



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 62]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-63" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         max-recv-level is present, it indicates the highest level the
         codec supports for receiving.  For either receiving or sending,
         all levels that are lower than the highest level supported MUST
         also be supported.

            Informative note: Capability exchange and session setup
            procedures should provide means to list the capabilities for
            each supported sub-profile separately.  For example, the
            one-of-N codec selection procedure of the SDP Offer/Answer
            model can be used (<a href="./rfc3264#section-10.2">Section&nbsp;10.2 of [RFC3264]</a>).  The one-of-N
            codec selection procedure may also be used to provide
            different combinations of profile_idc and profile-iop that
            represent the same sub-profile.  When there are many
            different combinations of profile_idc and profile-iop that
            represent the same sub-profile, using the one-of-N codec
            selection procedure may result in a fairly large SDP
            message.  Therefore, a receiver should understand the
            different equivalent combinations of profile_idc and
            profile-iop that represent the same sub-profile, and be
            ready to accept an offer using any of the equivalent
            combinations.

         If no profile-level-id is present, the Baseline Profile without
         additional constraints at Level 1 MUST be implied.

      max-recv-level:
         This parameter MAY be used to indicate the highest level a
         receiver supports when the highest level is higher than the
         default level (the level indicated by profile-level-id).  The
         value of max-recv-level is a base16 (hexadecimal)
         representation of the two bytes after the syntax element
         profile_idc in the sequence parameter set NAL unit specified in
         [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]: profile-iop (as defined above) and level_idc.  If (the
         level_idc byte of max-recv-level is equal to 11 and bit 4 of
         the profile-iop byte of max-recv-level is equal to 1) or (the
         level_idc byte of max-recv-level is equal to 9 and bit 4 of the
         profile-iop byte of max-recv-level is equal to 0), the highest
         level the receiver supports is Level 1b.  Otherwise, the
         highest level the receiver supports is equal to the level_idc
         byte of max-recv-level divided by 10.

         max-recv-level MUST NOT be present if the highest level the
         receiver supports is not higher than the default level.

      max-recv-base-level:
         This parameter MAY be used to indicate the highest level a
         receiver supports for the base layer when negotiating an SVC
         stream.  The value of max-recv-base-level is a base16



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 63]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-64" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         (hexadecimal) representation of the two bytes after the syntax
         element profile_idc in the sequence parameter set NAL unit
         specified in [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]: profile-iop (as defined above) and
         level_idc.  If (the level_idc byte of max-recv-level is equal
         to 11 and bit 4 of the profile-iop byte of max-recv-level is
         equal to 1) or (the level_idc byte of max-recv-level is equal
         to 9 and bit 4 of the profile-iop byte of max-recv-level is
         equal to 0), the highest level the receiver supports for the
         base layer is Level 1b. Otherwise, the highest level the
         receiver supports for the base layer is equal to the level_idc
         byte of max-recv-level divided by 10.

      max-mbps, max-fs, max-cpb, max-dpb, and max-br:
         The common properties of these parameters are specified in
         [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      max-mbps: This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      max-fs: This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      max-cpb: The value of max-cpb is an integer indicating the maximum
         coded picture buffer size in units of 1000 bits for the VCL HRD
         parameters and in units of 1200 bits for the NAL HRD
         parameters.  Note that this parameter does not use units of
         cpbBrVclFactor and cpbBrNALFactor (see Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]).
         The max-cpb parameter signals that the receiver has more memory
         than the minimum amount of coded picture buffer memory required
         by the signaled highest level conveyed in the value of the
         profile-level-id parameter or the max-recv-level parameter.
         When max-cpb is signaled, the receiver MUST be able to decode
         NAL unit streams that conform to the signaled highest level,
         with the exception that the MaxCPB value in Table A-1 of
         [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for the signaled highest level is replaced with the
         value of max-cpb (after taking cpbBrVclFactor and
         cpbBrNALFactor into consideration when needed).  The value of
         max-cpb (after taking cpbBrVclFactor and cpbBrNALFactor into
         consideration when needed) MUST be greater than or equal to the
         value of MaxCPB given in Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for the highest
         level.  Senders MAY use this knowledge to construct coded video
         streams with greater variation of bitrate than can be achieved
         with the MaxCPB value in Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].










<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 64]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-65" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


            Informative note: The coded picture buffer is used in the
            Hypothetical Reference Decoder (HRD, Annex C) of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].
            The use of the HRD is recommended in SVC encoders to verify
            that the produced bitstream conforms to the standard and to
            control the output bitrate.  Thus, the coded picture buffer
            is conceptually independent of any other potential buffers
            in the receiver, including de-interleaving, re-multiplexing,
            and de-jitter buffers.  The coded picture buffer need not be
            implemented in decoders as specified in Annex C of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>];
            standard-compliant decoders can have any buffering
            arrangements provided that they can decode standard-
            compliant bitstreams.  Thus, in practice, the input buffer
            for video decoder can be integrated with the de-
            interleaving, re-multiplexing, and de-jitter buffers of the
            receiver.

      max-dpb: This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      max-br: The value of max-br is an integer indicating the maximum
         video bitrate in units of 1000 bits per second for the VCL HRD
         parameters and in units of 1200 bits per second for the NAL HRD
         parameters.  Note that this parameter does not use units of
         cpbBrVclFactor and cpbBrNALFactor (see Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]).

         The max-br parameter signals that the video decoder of the
         receiver is capable of decoding video at a higher bitrate than
         is required by the signaled highest level conveyed in the value
         of the profile-level-id parameter or the max-recv-level
         parameter.

         When max-br is signaled, the video codec of the receiver MUST
         be able to decode NAL unit streams that conform to the signaled
         highest level, with the following exceptions in the limits
         specified by the highest level:

         o  The value of max-br (after taking cpbBrVclFactor and
            cpbBrNALFactor into consideration when needed) replaces the
            MaxBR value in Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] for the highest level.

         o  When the max-cpb parameter is not present, the result of the
            following formula replaces the value of MaxCPB in Table A-1
            of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]: (MaxCPB of the signaled level) * max-br / (MaxBR
            of the signaled highest level).

         For example, if a receiver signals capability for Main profile
         Level 1.2 with max-br equal to 1550, this indicates a maximum
         video bitrate of 1550 kbits/sec for VCL HRD parameters, a




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 65]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-66" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         maximum video bitrate of 1860 kbits/sec for NAL HRD parameters,
         and a CPB size of 4036458 bits (1550000 / 384000 * 1000 *
         1000).

         The value of max-br (after taking cpbBrVclFactor and
         cpbBrNALFactor into consideration when needed) MUST be greater
         than or equal to the value MaxBR given in Table A-1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>]
         for the signaled highest level.

         Senders MAY use this knowledge to send higher-bitrate video as
         allowed in the level definition of SVC, to achieve improved
         video quality.

            Informative note: This parameter was added primarily to
            complement a similar codepoint in the ITU-T Recommendation
            H.245, so as to facilitate signaling gateway designs.  No
            assumption can be made from the value of this parameter that
            the network is capable of handling such bitrates at any
            given time.  In particular, no conclusion can be drawn that
            the signaled bitrate is possible under congestion control
            constraints.

      redundant-pic-cap:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      sprop-parameter-sets:
         This parameter MAY be used to convey any sequence parameter
         set, subset sequence parameter set, and picture parameter set
         NAL units (herein referred to as the initial parameter set NAL
         units) that can be placed in the NAL unit stream to precede any
         other NAL units in decoding order and that are associated with
         the default level of profile-level-id.  The parameter MUST NOT
         be used to indicate codec capability in any capability exchange
         procedure.  The value of the parameter is a comma (',')
         separated list of base64 [<a href="./rfc4648" title="&quot;The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings&quot;">RFC4648</a>] representations of the
         parameter set NAL units as specified in Sections <a href="#section-7.3.2.1">7.3.2.1</a>,
         7.3.2.2, and G.7.3.2.1 of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  Note that the number of
         bytes in a parameter set NAL unit is typically less than 10,
         but a picture parameter set NAL unit can contain several
         hundreds of bytes.

            Informative note: When several payload types are offered in
            the SDP Offer/Answer model, each with its own sprop-
            parameter-sets parameter, then the receiver cannot assume
            that those parameter sets do not use conflicting storage
            locations (i.e., identical values of parameter set





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 66]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-67" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


            identifiers).  Therefore, a receiver should buffer all
            sprop-parameter-sets and make them available to the decoder
            instance that decodes a certain payload type.

      sprop-level-parameter-sets:
         This parameter MAY be used to convey any sequence, subset
         sequence, and picture parameter set NAL units (herein referred
         to as the initial parameter set NAL units) that can be placed
         in the NAL unit stream to precede any other NAL units in
         decoding order and that are associated with one or more levels
         different than the default level of profile-level-id.  The
         parameter MUST NOT be used to indicate codec capability in any
         capability exchange procedure.

         The sprop-level-parameter-sets parameter contains parameter
         sets for one or more levels that are different than the default
         level.  All parameter sets targeted for use when one level of
         the default sub-profile is accepted by a receiver are clustered
         and prefixed with a three-byte field that has the same syntax
         as profile-level-id.  This enables the receiver to install the
         parameter sets for the accepted level and discard the rest.
         The three-byte field is named PLId, and all parameter sets
         associated with one level are named PSL, which has the same
         syntax as sprop-parameter-sets.  Parameter sets for each level
         are represented in the form of PLId:PSL, i.e., PLId followed by
         a colon (':') and the base64 [<a href="./rfc4648" title="&quot;The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings&quot;">RFC4648</a>] representation of the
         initial parameter set NAL units for the level.  Each pair of
         PLId:PSL is also separated by a colon.  Note that a PSL can
         contain multiple parameter sets for that level, separated with
         commas (',').

         The subset of coding tools indicated by each PLId field MUST be
         equal to the default sub-profile, and the level indicated by
         each PLId field MUST be different than the default level.

            Informative note: This parameter allows for efficient level
            downgrade or upgrade in SDP Offer/Answer and out-of-band
            transport of parameter sets, simultaneously.

      in-band-parameter-sets:
         This parameter MAY be used to indicate a receiver capability.
         The value MAY be equal to either 0 or 1.  The value 1 indicates
         that the receiver discards out-of-band parameter sets in sprop-
         parameter-sets and sprop-level-parameter-sets, therefore the
         sender MUST transmit all parameter sets in-band.  The value 0
         indicates that the receiver utilizes out-of-band parameter sets
         included in sprop-parameter-sets and/or sprop-level-parameter-
         sets.  However, in this case, the sender MAY still choose to



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 67]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-68" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         send parameter sets in-band.  When the parameter is not
         present, this receiver capability is not specified, and
         therefore the sender MAY send out-of-band parameter sets only,
         or it MAY send in-band-parameter-sets only, or it MAY send
         both.

      packetization-mode:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  When the mst-mode
         parameter is present, the value of this parameter is
         additionally constrained as follows.  If mst-mode is equal to
         "NI-T", "NI-C", or "NI-TC", packetization-mode MUST NOT be
         equal to 2.  Otherwise, (mst-mode is equal to "I-C"),
         packetization-mode MUST be equal to 2.

      sprop-interleaving-depth:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      sprop-deint-buf-req:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      deint-buf-cap:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      sprop-init-buf-time:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      sprop-max-don-diff:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      max-rcmd-nalu-size:
         This parameter is as specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].

      mst-mode:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of a NAL
         unit stream or the capabilities of a receiver implementation.
         If this parameter is present, multi-session transmission MUST
         be used.  Otherwise (this parameter is not present), single-
         session transmission MUST be used.  When this parameter is
         present, the following applies.  When the value of mst-mode is
         equal to "NI-T", the NI-T mode MUST be used.  When the value of
         mst-mode is equal to "NI-C", the NI-C mode MUST be used.  When
         the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-TC", the NI-TC mode MUST
         be used.  When the value of mst-mode is equal to "I-C", the I-C
         mode MUST be used.  The value of mst-mode MUST have one of the
         following tokens: "NI-T", "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         All RTP sessions in an MST MUST have the same value of mst-
         mode.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 68]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-69" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      sprop-mst-csdon-always-present:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when mst-mode is not present
         or the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-T" or "I-C".  This
         parameter signals the properties of the NAL unit stream.  When
         sprop-mst-csdon-always-present is present and the value is
         equal to 1, packetization-mode MUST be equal to 1, and all the
         RTP packets carrying the NAL unit stream MUST be STAP-A packets
         containing a PACSI NAL unit that further contains the DONC
         field or NI-MTAP packets with the J field equal to 1.  When
         sprop-mst-csdon-always-present is present and the value is
         equal to 1, the CS-DON value of any particular NAL unit can be
         derived solely according to information in the packet
         containing the NAL unit.

         When sprop-mst-csdon-always-present is present in the current
         RTP session, it MUST be present also in all the RTP sessions
         the current RTP session depends on and the value of sprop-mst-
         csdon-always-present is identical for the current RTP session
         and all the RTP sessions on which the current RTP session
         depends.

      sprop-mst-remux-buf-size:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when mst-mode is not present
         or the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-T".  This parameter
         MUST be present when mst-mode is present and the value of mst-
         mode is equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         This parameter signals the properties of the NAL unit stream.
         It MUST be set to a value one less than the minimum re-
         multiplexing buffer size (in NAL units), so that it is
         guaranteed that receivers can reconstruct NAL unit decoding
         order as specified in Sub<a href="#section-6.2.2">section 6.2.2</a>.

         The value of sprop-mst-remux-buf-size MUST be an integer in the
         range of 0 to 32767, inclusive.

      sprop-remux-buf-req:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when mst-mode is not present
         or the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-T".  It MUST be
         present when mst-mode is present and the value of mst-mode is
         equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C".

         sprop-remux-buf-req signals the required size of the re-
         multiplexing buffer for the NAL unit stream.  It is guaranteed
         that receivers can recover the decoding order of the received
         NAL units from the current RTP session and the RTP sessions the





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 69]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-70" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         current RTP session depends on as specified in <a href="#section-6.2.2">Section 6.2.2</a>,
         when the re-multiplexing buffer size is of at least the value
         of sprop-remux-buf-req in units of bytes.

         The value of sprop-remux-buf-req MUST be an integer in the
         range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

      remux-buf-cap:
         This parameter MUST NOT be present when mst-mode is not present
         or the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-T".  This parameter
         MAY be used to signal the capabilities of a receiver
         implementation and indicates the amount of re-multiplexing
         buffer space in units of bytes that the receiver has available
         for recovering the NAL unit decoding order as specified in
         <a href="#section-6.2.2">Section 6.2.2</a>.  A receiver is able to handle any NAL unit
         stream for which the value of the sprop-remux-buf-req parameter
         is smaller than or equal to this parameter.

         If the parameter is not present, then a value of 0 MUST be used
         for remux-buf-cap.  The value of remux-buf-cap MUST be an
         integer in the range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

      sprop-remux-init-buf-time:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of the NAL
         unit stream.  The parameter MUST NOT be present if mst-mode is
         not present or the value of mst-mode is equal to "NI-T".

         The parameter signals the initial buffering time that a
         receiver MUST wait before starting to recover the NAL unit
         decoding order as specified in <a href="#section-6.2.2">Section 6.2.2</a> of this memo.

         The parameter is coded as a non-negative base10 integer
         representation in clock ticks of a 90-kHz clock.  If the
         parameter is not present, then no initial buffering time value
         is defined.  Otherwise, the value of sprop-remux-init-buf-time
         MUST be an integer in the range of 0 to 4294967295, inclusive.

      sprop-mst-max-don-diff:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of the NAL
         unit stream.  It MUST NOT be used to signal transmitter or
         receiver or codec capabilities.  The parameter MUST NOT be
         present if mst-mode is not present or the value of mst-mode is
         equal to "NI-T".  sprop-mst-max-don-diff is an integer in the
         range of 0 to 32767, inclusive.  If sprop-mst-max-don-diff is
         not present, the value of the parameter is unspecified.  sprop-
         mst-max-don-diff is calculated same as sprop-max-don-diff as
         specified in [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], with decoding order number being
         replaced by cross-session decoding order number.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 70]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-71" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      sprop-scalability-info:
         This parameter MAY be used to convey the NAL unit containing
         the scalability information SEI message as specified in Annex G
         of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  This parameter MAY be used to signal the contained
         layers of an SVC bitstream.  The parameter MUST NOT be used to
         indicate codec capability in any capability exchange procedure.
         The value of the parameter is the base64 [<a href="./rfc4648" title="&quot;The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings&quot;">RFC4648</a>]
         representation of the NAL unit containing the scalability
         information SEI message.  If present, the NAL unit MUST contain
         only one SEI message that is a scalability information SEI
         message.

         This parameter MAY be used in an offering or declarative SDP
         message to indicate what layers (operation points) can be
         provided.  A receiver MAY indicate its choice of one layer
         using the optional media type parameter scalable-layer-id.

      scalable-layer-id:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal a receiver's choice of the
         offers or declared operation points or layers using sprop-
         scalability-info or sprop-operation-point-info.  The value of
         scalable-layer-id is a base16 representation of the layer_id[ i
         ] syntax element in the scalability information SEI message as
         specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>] or layer-ID contained in sprop-
         operation-point-info.

      sprop-operation-point-info:
         This parameter MAY be used to describe the operation points of
         an RTP session.  The value of this parameter consists of a
         comma-separated list of operation-point-description vectors.
         The values given by the operation-point-description vectors are
         the same as, or are derived from, the values that would be
         given for a scalable layer in the scalability information SEI
         message as specified in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], where the term
         scalable layer in the scalability information SEI message
         refers to all NAL units associated with the same values of
         temporal_id, dependency_id, and quality_id.  In this memo, such
         a set of NAL units is called an operation point.

         Each operation-point-description vector has ten elements,
         provided as a comma-separated list of values as defined below.
         The first value of the operation-point-description vector is
         preceded by a '&lt;', and the last value of the operation-point-
         description vector is followed by a '&gt;'.  If the sprop-
         operation-point-info is followed by exactly one operation-
         point-description vector, this describes the highest operation
         point contained in the RTP session.  If there are two or more




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 71]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-72" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         operation-point-description vectors, the first describes the
         lowest and the last describes the highest operation point
         contained in the RTP session.

         The values given by the operation-point-description vector are
         as follows, in the order listed:

          - layer-ID: This value specifies the layer identifier of the
            operation point, which is identical to the layer_id that
            would be indicated (for the same values of dependency_id,
            quality_id, and temporal_id) in the scalability information
            SEI message.  This field MAY be empty, indicating that the
            value is unspecified.  When there are multiple operation-
            point-description vectors with layer-ID, the values of
            layer-ID do not need to be consecutive.

          - temporal-ID: This value specifies the temporal_id of the
            operation point.  This field MUST NOT be empty.

          - dependency-ID: This values specifies the dependency_id of
            the operation point.  This field MUST NOT be empty.

          - quality-ID: This values specifies the quality_id of the
            operation point.  This field MUST NOT be empty.

          - profile-level-ID: This value specifies the profile-level-idc
            of the operation point in the base16 format.  The default
            sub-profile or default level indicated by the parameter
            profile-level-ID in the sprop-operation-point-info vector
            SHALL be equal to or lower than the default sub-profile or
            default level indicated by profile-level-id, which may be
            either present or the default value is taken.  This field
            MAY be empty, indicating that the value is unspecified.

          - avg-framerate: This value specifies the average frame rate
            of the operation point.  This value is given as an integer
            in frames per 256 seconds.  The field MAY be empty,
            indicating that the value is unspecified.

          - width: This value specifies the width dimension in pixels of
            decoded frames for the operation point.  This parameter is
            not directly given in the scalability information SEI
            message.  This field MAY be empty, indicating that the value
            is unspecified.







<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 72]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-73" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


          - height: This value gives the height dimension in pixels of
            decoded frames for the operation point.  This parameter is
            not directly given in the scalability information SEI.  This
            field MAY be empty, indicating that the value is
            unspecified.

          - avg-bitrate: This value specifies the average bitrate of the
            operation point.  This parameter is given as an integer in
            kbits per second over the entire stream.  Note that this
            parameter is provided in the scalability information SEI
            message in bits per second and calculated over a variable
            time window.  This field MAY be empty, indicating that the
            value is unspecified.

          - max-bitrate: This value specifies the maximum bitrate of the
            operation point.  This parameter is given as an integer in
            kbits per second and describes the maximum bitrate per each
            one-second window.  Note that this parameter is provided in
            the scalability information SEI message in bits per second
            and is calculated over a variable time window.  This field
            MAY be empty, indicating that the value is unspecified.

            Similarly to sprop-scalability-info, this parameter MAY be
            used in an offering or declarative SDP message to indicate
            what layers (operation points) can be provided.  A receiver
            MAY indicate its choice of the highest layer it wants to
            send and/or receive using the optional media type parameter
            scalable-layer-id.

      sprop-no-NAL-reordering-required:
         This parameter MAY be used to signal the properties of the NAL
         unit stream.  This parameter MUST NOT be present when mst-mode
         is not present or the value of mst-mode is not equal to "NI-T".
         The presence of this parameter indicates that no reordering of
         non-VCL or VCL NAL units is required for the decoding order
         recovery process.

      sprop-avc-ready:
         This parameter MAY be used to indicate the properties of the
         NAL unit stream.  The presence of this parameter indicates that
         the RTP session, if used in SST, or used in MST combined with
         other RTP sessions also with this parameter present, can be
         processed by a [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] receiver.  This parameter MAY be used
         with RTP sessions with media subtype H264-SVC.

      Encoding considerations:
         This media type is framed and binary; see Section 4.8 of <a href="./rfc4288">RFC</a>
         <a href="./rfc4288">4288</a> [<a href="./rfc4288" title="&quot;Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures&quot;">RFC4288</a>].



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 73]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-74" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      Security considerations:
         See <a href="./rfc6190#section-8">Section&nbsp;8 of RFC 6190</a>.

      Published specification:
         Please refer to <a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a> and its <a href="#section-13">Section 13</a>.

      Additional information:
         none

      File extensions:     none

      Macintosh file type code: none

      Object identifier or OID: none

      Person &amp; email address to contact for further information:

         Ye-Kui Wang, yekui.wang@huawei.com

      Intended usage:      COMMON

      Restrictions on usage:
         This media type depends on RTP framing, and hence is only
         defined for transfer via RTP [<a href="./rfc3550" title="&quot;RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications&quot;">RFC3550</a>].  Transport within other
         framing protocols is not defined at this time.

      Interoperability considerations:
         The media subtype name contains "SVC" to avoid potential
         conflict with <a href="./rfc3984">RFC 3984</a> and its potential future replacement RTP
         payload format for H.264 non-SVC profiles.

      Applications that use this media type:
         Real-time video applications like video streaming, video
         telephony, and video conferencing.

      Author:

         Ye-Kui Wang, yekui.wang@huawei.com

      Change controller:
         IETF Audio/Video Transport working group delegated from the
         IESG.









<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 74]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-75" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2" href="#section-7.2">7.2</a>.  SDP Parameters</span>

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2.1" href="#section-7.2.1">7.2.1</a>.  Mapping of Payload Type Parameters to SDP</span>

   The media type video/H264-SVC string is mapped to fields in the
   Session Description Protocol (SDP) as follows:

   o  The media name in the "m=" line of SDP MUST be video.

   o  The encoding name in the "a=rtpmap" line of SDP MUST be H264-SVC
      (the media subtype).

   o  The clock rate in the "a=rtpmap" line MUST be 90000.

   o  The OPTIONAL parameters profile-level-id, max-recv-level, max-
      recv-base-level, max-mbps, max-fs, max-cpb, max-dpb, max-br,
      redundant-pic-cap, in-band-parameter-sets, packetization-mode,
      sprop-interleaving-depth, deint-buf-cap, sprop-deint-buf-req,
      sprop-init-buf-time, sprop-max-don-diff, max-rcmd-nalu-size, mst-
      mode, sprop-mst-csdon-always-present, sprop-mst-remux-buf-size,
      sprop-remux-buf-req, remux-buf-cap, sprop-remux-init-buf-time,
      sprop-mst-max-don-diff, and scalable-layer-id, when present, MUST
      be included in the "a=fmtp" line of SDP.  These parameters are
      expressed as a media type string, in the form of a semicolon-
      separated list of parameter=value pairs.

   o  The OPTIONAL parameters sprop-parameter-sets, sprop-level-
      parameter-sets, sprop-scalability-info, sprop-operation-point-
      info, sprop-no-NAL-reordering-required, and sprop-avc-ready, when
      present, MUST be included in the "a=fmtp" line of SDP or conveyed
      using the "fmtp" source attribute as specified in <a href="./rfc5576#section-6.3">Section&nbsp;6.3 of
      [RFC5576]</a>.  For a particular media format (i.e., RTP payload
      type), a sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-level-parameter-sets MUST
      NOT be both included in the "a=fmtp" line of SDP and conveyed
      using the "fmtp" source attribute.  When included in the "a=fmtp"
      line of SDP, these parameters are expressed as a media type
      string, in the form of a semicolon-separated list of
      parameter=value pairs.  When conveyed using the "fmtp" source
      attribute, these parameters are only associated with the given
      source and payload type as parts of the "fmtp" source attribute.

            Informative note: Conveyance of sprop-parameter-sets and
            sprop-level-parameter-sets using the "fmtp" source attribute
            allows for out-of-band transport of parameter sets in
            topologies like Topo-Video-switch-MCU [<a href="./rfc5117" title="&quot;RTP Topologies&quot;">RFC5117</a>].






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 75]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-76" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2.2" href="#section-7.2.2">7.2.2</a>.  Usage with the SDP Offer/Answer Model</span>

   When an SVC stream (with media subtype H264-SVC) is offered over RTP
   using SDP in an Offer/Answer model [<a href="./rfc3264" title="&quot;An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC3264</a>] for negotiation for
   unicast usage, the following limitations and rules apply:

   o  The parameters identifying a media format configuration for SVC
      are profile-level-id, packetization-mode, and mst-mode.  These
      media configuration parameters (except for the level part of
      profile-level-id) MUST be used symmetrically when the answerer
      does not include scalable-layer-id in the answer; i.e., the
      answerer MUST either maintain all configuration parameters or
      remove the media format (payload type) completely, if one or more
      of the parameter values are not supported.  Note that the level
      part of profile-level-id includes level_idc, and, for indication
      of level 1b when profile_idc is equal to 66, 77, or 88, bit 4
      (constraint_set3_flag) of profile-iop.  The level part of profile-
      level-id is changeable.

         Informative note: The requirement for symmetric use does not
         apply for the level part of profile-level-id, and does not
         apply for the other stream properties and capability
         parameters.

         Informative note: In [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], all the levels except for Level
         1b are equal to the value of level_idc divided by 10.  Level 1b
         is a level higher than Level 1.0 but lower than Level 1.1, and
         is signaled in an ad hoc manner.  For the Baseline, Main, and
         Extended profiles (with profile_idc equal to 66, 77, and 88,
         respectively), Level 1b is indicated by level_idc equal to 11
         (i.e., the same as level 1.1) and constraint_set3_flag equal to
         1.  For other profiles, Level 1b is indicated by level_idc
         equal to 9 (but note that Level 1b for these profiles is still
         higher than Level 1, which has level_idc equal to 10, and lower
         than Level 1.1).  In SDP Offer/Answer, an answer may indicate a
         level equal to or lower than the level indicated in the offer.
         Due to the ad hoc indication of Level 1b, offerers and
         answerers must check the value of bit 4 (constraint_set3_flag)
         of the middle octet of the parameter profile-level-id, when
         profile_idc is equal to 66, 77, or 88 and level_idc is equal to
         11.

      To simplify handling and matching of these configurations, the
      same RTP payload type number used in the offer should also be used
      in the answer, as specified in [<a href="./rfc3264" title="&quot;An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC3264</a>].  The same RTP payload
      type number used in the offer MUST also be used in the answer when
      the answer includes scalable-layer-id.  When the answer does not
      include scalable-layer-id, the answer MUST NOT contain a payload



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 76]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-77" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      type number used in the offer unless the configuration is exactly
      the same as in the offer or the configuration in the answer only
      differs from that in the offer with a level lower than the default
      level offered.

         Informative note: When an offerer receives an answer that does
         not include scalable-layer-id it has to compare payload types
         not declared in the offer based on the media type (i.e.,
         video/H264-SVC) and the above media configuration parameters
         with any payload types it has already declared.  This will
         enable it to determine whether the configuration in question is
         new or if it is equivalent to configuration already offered,
         since a different payload type number may be used in the
         answer.

      Since an SVC stream may contain multiple operation points, a
      facility is provided so that an answerer can select a different
      operation point than the entire SVC stream.  Specifically,
      different operation points MAY be described using the sprop-
      scalability-info or sprop-operation-point-info parameters.  The
      first one carries the entire scalability information SEI message
      defined in Annex G of [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>], whereas the second one may be
      derived, e.g., as a subset of this SEI message that only contains
      key information about an operation point.  Operation points, in
      both cases, are associated with a layer identifier.

      If such information (sprop-operation-point-info or sprop-
      scalability-info) is provided in an offer, an answerer MAY select
      from the various operation points offered in the sprop-
      scalability-information or sprop-operation-point-info parameters
      by including scalable-layer-id in the answer.  By this, the
      answerer indicates its selection of a particular operation point
      in the received and/or in the sent stream.  When such operation
      point selection takes place, i.e., the answerer includes scalable-
      layer-id in the answer, the media configuration parameters MUST
      NOT be present in the answer.  Rather, the media configuration
      that the answerer will use for receiving and/or sending is the one
      used for the selected operation point as indicated in the offer.

         Informative note: The ability to perform operation point
         selection enables a receiver to utilize the scalable nature of
         an SVC stream.

   o  The parameter max-recv-level, when present, declares the highest
      level supported for receiving.  In case max-recv-level is not
      present, the highest level supported for receiving is equal to the





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 77]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-78" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      default level indicated by the level part of profile-level-id.
      max-recv-level, when present, MUST be higher than the default
      level.

   o  The parameter max-recv-base-level, when present, declares the
      highest level of the base layer supported for receiving.  When
      max-recv-base-level is not present, the highest level supported
      for the base layer is not constrained separately from the SVC
      stream containing the base layer.  The endpoint at the other side
      MUST NOT send a scalable stream for which the base layer is of a
      level higher than max-recv-base-level.  Parameters declaring
      receiver capabilities above the default level (max-mbps, max-
      smbps, max-fs, max-cpb, max-dpb, max-br, and max-recv-level) do
      not apply to the base layer when max-recv-base-level is present.

   o  The parameters sprop-deint-buf-req, sprop-interleaving-depth,
      sprop-max-don-diff, sprop-init-buf-time, sprop-mst-csdon-always-
      present, sprop-remux-buf-req, sprop-mst-remux-buf-size, sprop-
      remux-init-buf-time, sprop-mst-max-don-diff, sprop-scalability-
      information, sprop-operation-point-info, sprop-no-NAL-reordering-
      required, and sprop-avc-ready describe the properties of the NAL
      unit stream that the offerer or answerer is sending for the media
      format configuration.  This differs from the normal usage of the
      Offer/Answer parameters: normally such parameters declare the
      properties of the stream that the offerer or the answerer is able
      to receive.  When dealing with SVC, the offerer assumes that the
      answerer will be able to receive media encoded using the
      configuration being offered.

         Informative note: The above parameters apply for any stream
         sent by the declaring entity with the same configuration; i.e.,
         they are dependent on their source.  Rather than being bound to
         the payload type, the values may have to be applied to another
         payload type when being sent, as they apply for the
         configuration.

   o  The capability parameters max-mbps, max-fs, max-cpb, max-dpb, max-
      br, redundant-pic-cap, and max-rcmd-nalu-size MAY be used to
      declare further capabilities of the offerer or answerer for
      receiving.  These parameters MUST NOT be present when the
      direction attribute is sendonly, and the parameters describe the
      limitations of what the offerer or answerer accepts for receiving
      streams.

   o  When mst-mode is not present and packetization-mode is equal to 2,
      the following applies.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 78]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-79" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      o  An offerer has to include the size of the de-interleaving
         buffer, sprop-deint-buf-req, in the offer.  To enable the
         offerer and answerer to inform each other about their
         capabilities for de-interleaving buffering, both parties are
         RECOMMENDED to include deint-buf-cap.  It is also RECOMMENDED
         to consider offering multiple payload types with different
         buffering requirements when the capabilities of the receiver
         are unknown.

   o  When mst-mode is present and equal to "NI-C", "NI-TC", or "I-C",
      the following applies.

      o  An offerer has to include sprop-remux-buf-req in the offer.  To
         enable the offerer and answerer to inform each other about
         their capabilities for re-multiplexing buffering, both parties
         are RECOMMENDED to include remux-buf-cap.  It is also
         RECOMMENDED to consider offering multiple payload types with
         different buffering requirements when the capabilities of the
         receiver are unknown.

   o  The sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-level-parameter-sets parameter,
      when present (included in the "a=fmtp" line of SDP or conveyed
      using the "fmtp" source attribute as specified in <a href="./rfc5576#section-6.3">Section&nbsp;6.3 of
      [RFC5576]</a>), is used for out-of-band transport of parameter sets.
      However, when out-of-band transport of parameter sets is used,
      parameter sets MAY still be additionally transported in-band.

      The answerer MAY use either out-of-band or in-band transport of
      parameter sets for the stream it is sending, regardless of whether
      out-of-band parameter sets transport has been used in the offerer-
      to-answerer direction.  Parameter sets included in an answer are
      independent of those parameter sets included in the offer, as they
      are used for decoding two different video streams, one from the
      answerer to the offerer, and the other in the opposite direction.

      The following rules apply to transport of parameter sets in the
      offerer-to-answerer direction.

      o  An offer MAY include either or both of sprop-parameter- sets
         and sprop-level-parameter-sets.  If neither sprop-parameter-
         sets nor sprop-level-parameter-sets is present in the offer,
         then only in-band transport of parameter sets is used.

      o  If the answer includes in-band-parameter-sets equal to 1, then
         the offerer MUST transmit parameter sets in-band.  Otherwise,
         the following applies.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 79]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-80" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


         o  If the level to use in the offerer-to-answerer direction is
            equal to the default level in the offer, the following
            applies.

               The answerer MUST be prepared to use the parameter sets
               included in sprop-parameter-sets, when present, for
               decoding the incoming NAL unit stream, and ignore sprop-
               level-parameter-sets, when present.

               When sprop-parameter-sets is not present in the offer,
               in-band transport of parameter sets MUST be used.

         o  Otherwise (the level to use in the offerer-to-answerer
            direction is not equal to the default level in the offer),
            the following applies.

               The answerer MUST be prepared to use the parameter sets
               that are included in sprop-level-parameter-sets for the
               accepted level (i.e., the default level in the answer,
               which is also the level to use in the offerer-to-answerer
               direction), when present, for decoding the incoming NAL
               unit stream, and ignore all other parameter sets included
               in sprop-level-parameter-sets and sprop-parameter-sets,
               when present.

               When no parameter sets for the accepted level are present
               in the sprop-level-parameter-sets, in-band transport of
               parameter sets MUST be used.

      The following rules apply to transport of parameter sets in the
      answerer-to-offerer direction.

      o  An answer MAY include either sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-
         level-parameter-sets, but MUST NOT include both of the two.  If
         neither sprop-parameter-sets nor sprop-level-parameter-sets is
         present in the answer, then only in-band transport of parameter
         sets is used.

      o  If the offer includes in-band-parameter-sets equal to 1, then
         the answerer MUST NOT include sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-
         level-parameter-sets in the answer and MUST transmit parameter
         sets in-band.  Otherwise, the following applies.

         o  If the level to use in the answerer-to-offerer direction is
            equal to the default level in the answer, the following
            applies.





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 80]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-81" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


               The offerer MUST be prepared to use the parameter sets
               included in sprop-parameter-sets, when present, for
               decoding the incoming NAL unit stream, and ignore sprop-
               level-parameter-sets, when present.

               When sprop-parameter-sets is not present in the answer,
               the answerer MUST transmit parameter sets in-band.

         o  Otherwise (the level to use in the answerer-to-offerer
            direction is not equal to the default level in the answer),
            the following applies.

               The offerer MUST be prepared to use the parameter sets
               that are included in sprop-level-parameter-sets for the
               level to use in the answerer-to-offerer direction, when
               present in the answer, for decoding the incoming NAL unit
               stream, and ignore all other parameter sets included in
               sprop-level-parameter-sets and sprop-parameter-sets, when
               present in the answer.

               When no parameter sets for the level to use in the
               answerer-to-offerer direction are present in sprop-level-
               parameter-sets in the answer, the answerer MUST transmit
               parameter sets in-band.

      When sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-level-parameter-sets is
      conveyed using the "fmtp" source attribute as specified in <a href="./rfc5576#section-6.3">Section</a>
      <a href="./rfc5576#section-6.3">6.3 of [RFC5576]</a>, the receiver of the parameters MUST store the
      parameter sets included in the sprop-parameter-sets or sprop-
      level-parameter-sets for the accepted level and associate them to
      the source given as a part of the "fmtp" source attribute.
      Parameter sets associated with one source MUST only be used to
      decode NAL units conveyed in RTP packets from the same source.
      When this mechanism is in use, SSRC collision detection and
      resolution MUST be performed as specified in [<a href="./rfc5576" title="&quot;Source-Specific Media Attributes in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC5576</a>].

         Informative note: Conveyance of sprop-parameter-sets and sprop-
         level-parameter-sets using the "fmtp" source attribute may be
         used in topologies like Topo-Video-switch-MCU [<a href="./rfc5117" title="&quot;RTP Topologies&quot;">RFC5117</a>] to
         enable out-of-band transport of parameter sets.

   For streams being delivered over multicast, the following rules
   apply:

   o  The media format configuration is identified by profile-level- id,
      including the level part, packetization-mode, and mst-mode.  These
      media format configuration parameters (including the level part of
      profile-level-id) MUST be used symmetrically; i.e., the answerer



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 81]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-82" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      MUST either maintain all configuration parameters or remove the
      media format (payload type) completely.  Note that this implies
      that the level part of profile-level-id for Offer/Answer in
      multicast is not changeable.

      To simplify handling and matching of these configurations, the
      same RTP payload type number used in the offer should also be used
      in the answer, as specified in [<a href="./rfc3264" title="&quot;An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC3264</a>].  An answer MUST NOT
      contain a payload type number used in the offer unless the
      configuration is the same as in the offer.

   o  Parameter sets received MUST be associated with the originating
      source, and MUST be only used in decoding the incoming NAL unit
      stream from the same source.

   o  The rules for other parameters are the same as above for unicast
      as long as the above rules are obeyed.

   Table 14 lists the interpretation of all the parameters that MUST be
   used for the various combinations of offer, answer, and direction
   attributes.  Note that the two columns wherein the scalable-layer-id
   parameter is used only apply to answers, whereas the other columns
   apply to both offers and answers.

   Table 14.  Interpretation of parameters for various combinations of
   offers, answers, direction attributes, with and without scalable-
   layer-id.  Columns that do not indicate offer or answer apply to
   both.























<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 82]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-83" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


                                       sendonly --+
          answer: recvonly,scalable-layer-id --+  |
           recvonly w/o scalable-layer-id --+  |  |
   answer: sendrecv, scalable-layer-id --+  |  |  |
     sendrecv w/o scalable-layer-id --+  |  |  |  |
                                      |  |  |  |  |
   profile-level-id                   C  X  C  X  P
   max-recv-level                     R  R  R  R  -
   max-recv-base-level                R  R  R  R  -
   packetization-mode                 C  X  C  X  P
   mst-mode                           C  X  C  X  P
   sprop-avc-ready                    P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-deint-buf-req                P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-init-buf-time                P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-interleaving-depth           P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-max-don-diff                 P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-mst-csdon-always-present     P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-mst-max-don-diff             P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-mst-remux-buf-size           P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-no-NAL-reordering-required   P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-operation-point-info         P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-remux-buf-req                P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-remux-init-buf-time          P  P  -  -  P
   sprop-scalability-info             P  P  -  -  P
   deint-buf-cap                      R  R  R  R  -
   max-br                             R  R  R  R  -
   max-cpb                            R  R  R  R  -
   max-dpb                            R  R  R  R  -
   max-fs                             R  R  R  R  -
   max-mbps                           R  R  R  R  -
   max-rcmd-nalu-size                 R  R  R  R  -
   redundant-pic-cap                  R  R  R  R  -
   remux-buf-cap                      R  R  R  R  -
   in-band-parameter-sets             R  R  R  R  -
   sprop-parameter-sets               S  S  -  -  S
   sprop-level-parameter-sets         S  S  -  -  S
   scalable-layer-id                  X  O  X  O  -

   Legend:

   C: configuration for sending and receiving streams
   P: properties of the stream to be sent
   R: receiver capabilities
   S: out-of-band parameter sets
   O: operation point selection
   X: MUST NOT be present
   -: not usable, when present SHOULD be ignored




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 83]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-84" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   Parameters used for declaring receiver capabilities are in general
   downgradable; i.e., they express the upper limit for a sender's
   possible behavior.  Thus, a sender MAY select to set its encoder
   using only lower/lesser or equal values of these parameters.

   Parameters declaring a configuration point are not changeable, with
   the exception of the level part of the profile-level-id parameter for
   unicast usage.  This expresses values a receiver expects to be used
   and must be used verbatim on the sender side.  If level downgrading
   (for profile-level-id) is used, an answerer MUST NOT include the
   scalable-layer-id parameter.

   When a sender's capabilities are declared, and non-downgradable
   parameters are used in this declaration, then these parameters
   express a configuration that is acceptable for the sender to receive
   streams.  In order to achieve high interoperability levels, it is
   often advisable to offer multiple alternative configurations, e.g.,
   for the packetization mode.  It is impossible to offer multiple
   configurations in a single payload type.  Thus, when multiple
   configuration offers are made, each offer requires its own RTP
   payload type associated with the offer.

   A receiver SHOULD understand all media type parameters, even if it
   only supports a subset of the payload format's functionality.  This
   ensures that a receiver is capable of understanding when an offer to
   receive media can be downgraded to what is supported by the receiver
   of the offer.

   An answerer MAY extend the offer with additional media format
   configurations.  However, to enable their usage, in most cases a
   second offer is required from the offerer to provide the stream
   property parameters that the media sender will use.  This also has
   the effect that the offerer has to be able to receive this media
   format configuration, not only to send it.

   If an offerer wishes to have non-symmetric capabilities between
   sending and receiving, the offerer can allow asymmetric levels via
   level-asymmetry-allowed equal to 1.  Alternatively, the offerer can
   offer different RTP sessions, i.e., different media lines declared as
   "recvonly" and "sendonly", respectively.  This may have further
   implications on the system, and may require additional external
   semantics to associate the two media lines.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2.3" href="#section-7.2.3">7.2.3</a>.  Dependency Signaling in Multi-Session Transmission</span>

   If MST is used, the rules on signaling media decoding dependency in
   SDP as defined in [<a href="./rfc5583" title="&quot;Signaling Media Decoding Dependency in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC5583</a>] apply.  The rules on "hierarchical or
   layered encoding" with multicast in <a href="./rfc4566#section-5.7">Section&nbsp;5.7 of [RFC4566]</a> do not



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 84]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-85" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   apply, i.e., the notation for Connection Data "c=" SHALL NOT be used
   with more than one address.  Additionally, the order of dependencies
   of the RTP sessions indicated by the "a=depend" attribute as defined
   in [<a href="./rfc5583" title="&quot;Signaling Media Decoding Dependency in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)&quot;">RFC5583</a>] MUST represent the decoding order of the VC) NAL units
   in an access unit, i.e., the order of session dependency is given
   from the base or the lowest enhancement RTP session (the most
   important) to the highest enhancement RTP session (the least
   important).

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2.4" href="#section-7.2.4">7.2.4</a>.  Usage in Declarative Session Descriptions</span>

   When SVC over RTP is offered with SDP in a declarative style, as in
   Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP) [<a href="./rfc2326" title="&quot;Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP)&quot;">RFC2326</a>] or Session Announcement
   Protocol (SAP) [<a href="./rfc2974" title="&quot;Session Announcement Protocol&quot;">RFC2974</a>], the following considerations are necessary.

   o  All parameters capable of indicating both stream properties and
      receiver capabilities are used to indicate only stream properties.
      For example, in this case, the parameter profile-level-id declares
      the values used by the stream, not the capabilities for receiving
      streams.  This results in that the following interpretation of the
      parameters MUST be used:

      Declaring actual configuration or stream properties:

         - profile-level-id
         - packetization-mode
         - mst-mode
         - sprop-deint-buf-req
         - sprop-interleaving-depth
         - sprop-max-don-diff
         - sprop-init-buf-time
         - sprop-mst-csdon-always-present
         - sprop-mst-remux-buf-size
         - sprop-remux-buf-req
         - sprop-remux-init-buf-time
         - sprop-mst-max-don-diff
         - sprop-scalability-info
         - sprop-operation-point-info
         - sprop-no-NAL-reordering-required
         - sprop-avc-ready

      Out-of-band transporting of parameter sets:

         - sprop-parameter-sets
         - sprop-level-parameter-sets






<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 85]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-86" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      Not usable (when present, they SHOULD be ignored):

         - max-mbps
         - max-fs
         - max-cpb
         - max-dpb
         - max-br
         - max-recv-level
         - max-recv-base-level
         - redundant-pic-cap
         - max-rcmd-nalu-size
         - deint-buf-cap
         - remux-buf-cap
         - scalable-layer-id

   o  A receiver of the SDP is required to support all parameters and
      values of the parameters provided; otherwise, the receiver MUST
      reject (RTSP) or not participate in (SAP) the session.  It falls
      on the creator of the session to use values that are expected to
      be supported by the receiving application.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3" href="#section-7.3">7.3</a>.  Examples</span>

   In the following examples, "{data}" is used to indicate a data string
   encoded as base64.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3.1" href="#section-7.3.1">7.3.1</a>.  Example for Offering a Single SVC Session</span>

   Example 1: The offerer offers one video media description including
   two RTP payload types.  The first payload type offers H264, and the
   second offers H264-SVC.  Both payload types have different fmtp
   parameters as profile-level-id, packetization-mode, and sprop-
   parameter-sets.

      Offerer -&gt; Answerer SDP message:

      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 97 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{pps0};
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{pps0},{sps1},{pps1};

   If the answerer does not support media subtype H264-SVC, it can issue
   an answer accepting only the base layer offer (payload type 96).  In
   the following example, the receiver supports H264-SVC, so it lists
   payload type 97 first as the preferred option.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 86]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-87" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      Answerer -&gt; Offerer SDP message:

      m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 97 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps2},{pps2};
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps2},{pps2},{sps3},{pps3};

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3.2" href="#section-7.3.2">7.3.2</a>.  Example for Offering a Single SVC Session Using</span>
<span class="h4">        scalable-layer-id</span>

   Example 2: Offerer offers the same media configurations as shown in
   the example above for receiving and sending the stream, but using a
   single RTP payload type and including sprop-operation-point-info.

      Offerer -&gt; Answerer SDP message:

      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{sps1},{pps0},{pps1};
       sprop-operation-point-info=&lt;1,0,0,0,4de00a,3200,176,144,128,
      256&gt;,&lt;2,1,1,0,53000c,6400,352,288,256,512&gt;;

   In this example, the receiver supports H264-SVC and chooses the lower
   operation point offered in the RTP payload type for sending and
   receiving the stream.

      Answerer -&gt; Offerer SDP message:

      m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 sprop-parameter-sets={sps2},{sps3},{pps2},{pps3};
       scalable-layer-id=1;

   In an equivalent example showing the use of sprop-scalability-info
   instead using the sprop-operation-point-info, the sprop-operation-
   point-info would be exchanged by the sprop-scalability-info followed
   by the binary (base16) representation of the Scalability Information
   SEI message.

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3.3" href="#section-7.3.3">7.3.3</a>.  Example for Offering Multiple Sessions in MST</span>

   Example 3: In this example, the offerer offers a multi-session
   transmission with up to three sessions.  The base session media
   description includes payload types that are backward compatible with



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 87]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-88" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>], and three different payload types are offered.  The other
   two media are using payload types with media subtype H264-SVC.  In
   each media description, different values of profile-level-id,
   packetization-mode, mst-mode, and sprop-parameter-sets are offered.

      Offerer -&gt; Answerer SDP message:

      a=group:DDP L1 L2 L3
      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 96 97 98
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{pps0};
      a=rtpmap:97 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-TC; sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{pps0};
      a=rtpmap:98 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:98 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=2;
       mst-mode=I-C; init-buf-time=156320;
       sprop-parameter-sets={sps0},{pps0};
      a=mid:L1
      m=video 20002 RTP/AVP 99 100
      a=rtpmap:99 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:99 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps1},{pps1};
      a=rtpmap:100 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:100 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=2;
       mst-mode=I-C; sprop-parameter-sets={sps1},{pps1};
      a=mid:L2
      a=depend:99 lay L1:96,97; 100 lay L1:98
      m=video 20004 RTP/AVP 101
      a=rtpmap:101 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:101 profile-level-id=53001F; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps2},{pps2};
      a=mid:L3
      a=depend:101 lay L1:96,97 L2:99

   It is assumed that in this example the answerer only supports the NI-
   T mode for multi-session transmission.  For this reason, it chooses
   the corresponding payload type (96) for the base RTP session.  For
   the two enhancement RTP sessions, the answerer also chooses the
   payload types that use the NI-T mode (99 and 101).










<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 88]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-89" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


      Answerer -&gt; Offerer SDP message:

      a=group:DDP L1 L2 L3
      m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps3},{pps3};
      a=mid:L1
      m=video 40002 RTP/AVP 99
      a=rtpmap:99 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:99 profile-level-id=53000c; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps4},{pps4};
      a=mid:L2
      a=depend:99 lay L1:96
      m=video 40004 RTP/AVP 101
      a=rtpmap:101 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:101 profile-level-id=53001F; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-T; sprop-parameter-sets={sps5},{pps5};
      a=mid:L3
      a=depend:101 lay L1:96 L2:99

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3.4" href="#section-7.3.4">7.3.4</a>.  Example for Offering Multiple Sessions in MST Including</span>
<span class="h4">        Operation with Answerer Using scalable-layer-id</span>

   Example 4: In this example, the offerer offers a multi-session
   transmission of three layers with up to two sessions.  The base
   session media description has a payload type that is backward
   compatible with [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>].  Note that no parameter sets are provided,
   in which case in-band transport must be used.  The other media
   description contains two enhancement layers and uses the media
   subtype H264-SVC.  It includes two operation point definitions.

      Offerer -&gt; Answerer SDP message:

      a=group:DDP L1 L2
      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       mst-mode=NI-T;
      a=mid:L1
      m=video 20002 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53001F; packetization-mode=1;
       mst-mode=NI-TC; sprop-operation-point-info=&lt;2,0,1,0,53000c,
      3200,352,288,384,512&gt;,&lt;3,1,2,0,53001F,6400,704,576,768,1024&gt;;
      a=mid:L2
      a=depend:97 lay L1:96




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 89]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-90" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   It is assumed that the answerer wants to send and receive the base
   layer (payload type 96), but it only wants to send and receive the
   lower enhancement layer, i.e., the one with layer id equal to 2.  For
   this reason, the response will include the selection of the desired
   layer by setting scalable-layer-id equal to 2.  Note that the answer
   only includes the scalable-layer-id information.  The answer could
   include sprop-parameter-sets in the response.

      Answerer -&gt; Offerer SDP message:

      a=group:DDP L1 L2
      m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=4de00a; packetization-mode=0;
       mst-mode=NI-T;
      a=mid:L1
      m=video 40002 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 scalable-layer-id=2;
      a=mid:L2
      a=depend:97 lay L1:96

<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.3.5" href="#section-7.3.5">7.3.5</a>.  Example for Negotiating an SVC Stream with a Constrained Base</span>
<span class="h4">        Layer in SST</span>

   Example 5: The offerer (Alice) offers one video description including
   two RTP payload types with differing levels and packetization modes.

      Offerer -&gt; Answerer SDP message:

      m=video 20000 RTP/AVP 97 96
      a=rtpmap:96 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=53001e; packetization-mode=0;
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53001f; packetization-mode=1;

   The answerer (Bridge) chooses packetization mode 1, and indicates
   that it would receive an SVC stream with the base layer being
   constrained.

      Answerer -&gt; Offerer SDP message:

      m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 H264-SVC/90000
      a=fmtp:97 profile-level-id=53001f; packetization-mode=1;
        max-recv-base-level=000d





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 90]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-91" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   The answering endpoint must send an SVC stream at Level 3.1.  Since
   the offering endpoint did not declare max-recv-base-level, the base
   layer of the SVC stream the answering endpoint must send is not
   specifically constrained.  The offering endpoint (Alice) must send an
   SVC stream at Level 3.1, for which the base layer must be of a level
   not higher than Level 1.3.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.4" href="#section-7.4">7.4</a>.  Parameter Set Considerations</span>

   <a href="./rfc6184#section-8.4">Section&nbsp;8.4 of [RFC6184]</a> applies in this memo, with the following
   applies additionally for multi-session transmission (MST).

   In MST, regardless of out-of-band or in-band transport of parameter
   sets are in use, parameter sets required for decoding NAL units
   carried in one particular RTP session SHOULD be carried in the same
   session, MAY be carried in a session that the particular RTP session
   depends on, and MUST NOT be carried in a session that the particular
   RTP session does not depend on.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>.  Security Considerations</span>

   The security considerations of the RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video
   specification [<a href="./rfc6184" title="&quot;RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video&quot;">RFC6184</a>] apply.  Additionally, the following applies.

   Decoders MUST exercise caution with respect to the handling of
   reserved NAL unit types and reserved SEI messages, particularly if
   they contain active elements, and MUST restrict their domain of
   applicability to the presentation containing the stream.  The safest
   way is to simply discard these NAL units and SEI messages.

   When integrity protection is applied to a stream, care MUST be taken
   that the stream being transported may be scalable; hence a receiver
   may be able to access only part of the entire stream.

   End-to-end security with either authentication, integrity, or
   confidentiality protection will prevent a MANE from performing media-
   aware operations other than discarding complete packets.  And in the
   case of confidentiality protection it will even be prevented from
   performing discarding of packets in a media-aware way.  To allow any
   MANE to perform its operations, it will be required to be a trusted
   entity that is included in the security context establishment.  This
   applies both for the media path and for the RTCP path, if RTCP
   packets need to be rewritten.








<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 91]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-92" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-9" href="#section-9">9</a>.  Congestion Control</span>

   Within any given RTP session carrying payload according to this
   specification, the provisions of <a href="./rfc6184#section-10">Section&nbsp;10 of [RFC6184]</a> apply.
   Reducing the session bitrate is possible by one or more of the
   following means:

   a) Within the highest layer identified by the DID field remove any
      NAL units with QID higher than a certain value.

   b) Remove all NAL units with TID higher than a certain value.

   c) Remove all NAL units associated with a DID higher than a certain
      value.

         Informative note: Removal of all coded slice NAL units
         associated with DIDs higher than a certain value in the entire
         stream is required in order to preserve conformance of the
         resulting SVC stream.

   d) Utilize the PRID field to indicate the relative importance of NAL
      units, and remove all NAL units associated with a PRID higher than
      a certain value.  Note that the use of the PRID is application-
      specific.

   e) Remove NAL units or entire packets according to application-
      specific rules.  The result will depend on the particular coding
      structure used as well as any additional application-specific
      functionality (e.g., concealment performed at the receiving
      decoder).  In general, this will result in the reception of a non-
      conforming bitstream and hence the decoder behavior is not
      specified by [<a href="#ref-H.264" title="&quot;Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services&quot;">H.264</a>].  Significant artifacts may therefore appear
      in the decoded output if the particular decoder implementation
      does not take appropriate action in response to congestion
      control.

      Informative note: The discussion above is centered on NAL units
      rather than packets, primarily because that is the level where
      senders can meaningfully manipulate the scalable bitstream.  The
      mapping of NAL units to RTP packets is fairly flexible when using
      aggregation packets.  Depending on the nature of the congestion
      control algorithm, the "dimension" of congestion measurement
      (packet count or bitrate) and reaction to it (reducing packet
      count or bitrate or both) can be adjusted accordingly.

   All aforementioned means are available to the RTP sender, regardless
   of whether that sender is located in the sending endpoint or in a
   mixer-based MANE.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 92]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-93" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   When a translator-based MANE is employed, then the MANE MAY
   manipulate the session only on the MANE's outgoing path, so that the
   sensed end-to-end congestion falls within the permissible envelope.
   As with all translators, in this case, the MANE needs to rewrite RTCP
   RRs to reflect the manipulations it has performed on the session.

      Informative note: Applications MAY also implement, in addition or
      separately, other congestion control mechanisms, e.g., as
      described in [<a href="./rfc5775" title="&quot;Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC) Protocol Instantiation&quot;">RFC5775</a>] and [<a href="#ref-Yan" title="&quot;Media- and TCP-friendly congestion control for scalable video streams&quot;">Yan</a>].

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-10" href="#section-10">10</a>.  IANA Considerations</span>

   A new media type, as specified in <a href="#section-7.1">Section 7.1</a> of this memo, has been
   registered with IANA.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-11" href="#section-11">11</a>.  Informative Appendix: Application Examples</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-11.1" href="#section-11.1">11.1</a>.  Introduction</span>

   Scalable video coding is a concept that has been around since at
   least MPEG-2 [<a href="#ref-MPEG2">MPEG2</a>], which goes back as early as 1993.
   Nevertheless, it has never gained wide acceptance, perhaps partly
   because applications didn't materialize in the form envisioned during
   standardization.

   ISO/IEC MPEG and ITU-T VCEG, respectively, performed a requirement
   analysis for the SVC project.  The MPEG and VCEG requirement
   documents are available in [<a href="#ref-JVT-N026" title="&quot;SVC requirements specified by MPEG (ISO/IEC JTC1 SC29 WG11)&quot;">JVT-N026</a>] and [<a href="#ref-JVT-N027" title="&quot;SVC requirements specified by VCEG (ITU-T SG16 Q.6)&quot;">JVT-N027</a>], respectively.

   The following introduces four main application scenarios that the
   authors consider relevant and that are implementable with this
   specification.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-11.2" href="#section-11.2">11.2</a>.  Layered Multicast</span>

   This well-understood form of the use of layered coding [<a href="#ref-McCanne" title="&quot;Receiver- driven layered multicast&quot;">McCanne</a>]
   implies that all layers are individually conveyed in their own RTP
   packet streams, each carried in its own RTP session using the IP
   (multicast) address and port number as the single demultiplexing
   point.  Receivers "tune" into the layers by subscribing to the IP
   multicast, normally by using IGMP [<a href="#ref-IGMP" title="&quot;Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3&quot;">IGMP</a>].  Depending on the
   application scenario, it is also possible to convey a number of
   layers in one RTP session, when finer operation points within the
   subset of layers are not needed.

   Layered multicast has the great advantage of simplicity and easy
   implementation.  However, it has also the great disadvantage of
   utilizing many different transport addresses.  While the authors



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 93]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-94" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   consider this not to be a major problem for a professionally
   maintained content server, receiving client endpoints need to open
   many ports to IP multicast addresses in their firewalls.  This is a
   practical problem from a firewall and network address translation
   (NAT) viewpoint.  Furthermore, even today IP multicast is not as
   widely deployed as many wish.

   The authors consider layered multicast an important application
   scenario for the following reasons.  First, it is well understood and
   the implementation constraints are well known.  Second, there may
   well be large-scale IP networks outside the immediate Internet
   context that may wish to employ layered multicast in the future.  One
   possible example could be a combination of content creation and core-
   network distribution for the various mobile TV services, e.g., those
   being developed by 3GPP (MBMS) [<a href="#ref-MBMS">MBMS</a>] and DVB (DVB-H) [<a href="#ref-DVB-H" title="ETSI TR 102 377">DVB-H</a>].

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-11.3" href="#section-11.3">11.3</a>.  Streaming</span>

   In this scenario, a streaming server has a repository of stored SVC
   coded layers for a given content.  At the time of streaming, and
   according to the capabilities, connectivity, and congestion situation
   of the client(s), the streaming server generates and serves a
   scalable stream.  Both unicast and multicast serving is possible.  At
   the same time, the streaming server may use the same repository of
   stored layers to compose different streams (with a different set of
   layers) intended for other audiences.

   As every endpoint receives only a single SVC RTP session, the number
   of firewall pinholes can be optimized to one.

   The main difference between this scenario and straightforward
   simulcasting lies in the architecture and the requirements of the
   streaming server, and is therefore out of the scope of IETF
   standardization.  However, compelling arguments can be made why such
   a streaming server design makes sense.  One possible argument is
   related to storage space and channel bandwidth.  Another is bandwidth
   adaptability without transcoding -- a considerable advantage in a
   congestion controlled network.  When the streaming server learns
   about congestion, it can reduce the sending bitrate by choosing fewer
   layers when composing the layered stream; see <a href="#section-9">Section 9</a>.  SVC is
   designed to gracefully support both bandwidth ramp-down and bandwidth
   ramp-up with a considerable dynamic range.  This payload format is
   designed to allow for bandwidth flexibility in the mentioned sense.
   While, in theory, a transcoding step could achieve a similar dynamic
   range, the computational demands are impractically high and video
   quality is typically lowered -- therefore, few (if any) streaming
   servers implement full transcoding.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 94]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-95" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-11.4" href="#section-11.4">11.4</a>.  Videoconferencing (Unicast to MANE, Unicast to Endpoints)</span>

   Videoconferencing has traditionally relied on Multipoint Control
   Units (MCUs).  These units connect endpoints in a star configuration
   and operate as follows.  Coded video is transmitted from each
   endpoint to the MCU, where it is decoded, scaled, and composited to
   construct output frames, which are then re-encoded and transmitted to
   the endpoint(s).  In systems supporting personalized layout (each
   user is allowed to select the layout of his/her screen), the
   compositing and encoding process is performed for each of the
   receiving endpoints.  Even without personalized layout, rate matching
   still requires that the encoding process at the MCU is performed
   separately for each endpoint.  As a result, MCUs have considerable
   complexity and introduce significant delay.  The cascaded encodings
   also reduce the video quality.  Particularly for multipoint
   connections, interactive communication is cumbersome as the end-to-
   end delay is very high [<a href="#ref-G.114" title="&quot;One-way transmission time&quot;">G.114</a>].  A simpler architecture is the
   switching MCU, in which one of the incoming video streams is
   redirected to the receiving endpoints.  Obviously, only one user at a
   time can be seen and rate matching cannot be performed, thus forcing
   all transmitting endpoints to transmit at the lowest bit rate
   available in the MCU-to-endpoint connections.

   With scalable video coding the MCU can be replaced with an
   application-level router (ALR): this unit simply selects which
   incoming packets should be transmitted to which of the receiving
   endpoints [<a href="#ref-Eleft" title="&quot;Multipoint Videoconferencing with Scalable Video Coding&quot;">Eleft</a>].  In such a system, each endpoint performs its own
   composition of the incoming video streams.  Assuming, for example, a
   system that uses spatial scalability with two layers, personalized
   layout is equivalent to instructing the ALR to only send the required
   packets for the corresponding resolution to the particular endpoint.
   Similarly, rate matching at the ALR for a particular endpoint can be
   performed by selecting an appropriate subset of the incoming video
   packets to transmit to the particular endpoint.  Personalized layout
   and rate matching thus become routing decisions, and require no
   signal processing.  Note that scalability also allows participants to
   enjoy the best video quality afforded by their links, i.e., users no
   longer have to be forced to operate at the quality supported by the
   weakest endpoint.  Most importantly, the ALR has an insignificant
   contribution to the end-to-end delay, typically an order of magnitude
   less than an MCU.  This makes it possible to have fully interactive
   multipoint conferences with even a very large number of participants.
   There are significant advantages as well in terms of error resilience
   and, in fact, error tolerance can be increased by nearly an order of
   magnitude here as well (e.g., using unequal error protection).
   Finally, the very low delay of an ALR allows these systems to be





<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 95]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-96" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   cascaded, with significant benefits in terms of system design and
   deployment.  Cascading of traditional MCUs is impossible due to the
   very high delay that even a single MCU introduces.

   Scalable video coding enables a very significant paradigm shift in
   videoconferencing systems, bringing the complexity of video
   communication systems (particularly the servers residing within the
   network) in line with other types of network applications.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-11.5" href="#section-11.5">11.5</a>.  Mobile TV (Multicast to MANE, Unicast to Endpoint)</span>

   This scenario is a bit more complex, and designed to optimize the
   network traffic in a core network, while still requiring only a
   single pinhole in the endpoint's firewall.  One of its key
   applications is the mobile TV market.

   Consider a large private IP network, e.g., the core network of the
   Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP).  Streaming servers
   within this core network can be assumed to be professionally
   maintained.  It is assumed that these servers can have many ports
   open to the network and that layered multicast is a real option.
   Therefore, the streaming server multicasts SVC scalable layers,
   instead of simulcasting different representations of the same content
   at different bitrates.

   Also consider many endpoints of different classes.  Some of these
   endpoints may lack the processing power or the display size to
   meaningfully decode all layers; others may have these capabilities.
   Users of some endpoints may wish not to pay for high quality and are
   happy with a base service, which may be cheaper or even free.  Other
   users are willing to pay for high quality.  Finally, some connected
   users may have a bandwidth problem in that they can't receive the
   bandwidth they would want to receive -- be it through congestion,
   connectivity, change of service quality, or for whatever other
   reasons.  However, all these users have in common that they don't
   want to be exposed too much, and therefore the number of firewall
   pinholes needs to be small.

   This situation can be handled best by introducing middleboxes close
   to the edge of the core network, which receive the layered multicast
   streams and compose the single SVC scalable bitstream according to
   the needs of the endpoint connected.  These middleboxes are called
   MANEs throughout this specification.  In practice, the authors
   envision the MANE to be part of (or at least physically and
   topologically close to) the base station of a mobile network, where
   all the signaling and media traffic necessarily are multiplexed on
   the same physical link.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 96]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-97" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   MANEs necessarily need to be fairly complex devices.  They certainly
   need to understand the signaling, so, for example, to associate the
   payload type octet in the RTP header with the SVC payload type.

   A MANE may aggregate multiple RTP streams, possibly from multiple RTP
   sessions, thus to reduce the number of firewall pinholes required at
   the endpoints, or may optimize the outgoing RTP stream to the MTU
   size of the outgoing path by utilizing the aggregation and
   fragmentation mechanisms of this memo.  This type of MANE is
   conceptually easy to implement and can offer powerful features,
   primarily because it necessarily can "see" the payload (including the
   RTP payload headers), utilize the wealth of layering information
   available therein, and manipulate it.

   A MANE can also perform stream thinning, in order to adhere to
   congestion control principles as discussed in <a href="#section-9">Section 9</a>.  While the
   implementation of the forward (media) channel of such a MANE appears
   to be comparatively simple, the need to rewrite RTCP RRs makes even
   such a MANE a complex device.

   While the implementation complexity of either case of a MANE, as
   discussed above, is fairly high, the computational demands are
   comparatively low.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-12" href="#section-12">12</a>.  Acknowledgements</span>

   Miska Hannuksela contributed significantly to the designs of the
   PACSI NAL unit and the NI-C mode for decoding order recovery.  Roni
   Even organized and coordinated the design team for the development of
   this memo, and provided valuable comments.  Jonathan Lennox
   contributed to the NAL unit reordering algorithm for MST and provided
   input on several parts of this memo.  Peter Amon, Sam Ganesan, Mike
   Nilsson, Colin Perkins, and Thomas Wiegand were members of the design
   team and provided valuable contributions.  Magnus Westerlund has also
   made valuable comments.  Charles Eckel and Stuart Taylor provided
   valuable comments after the first WGLC for this document.  Xiaohui
   (Joanne) Wei helped improving Table 13 and the SDP examples.

   The work of Thomas Schierl has been supported by the European
   Commission under contract number FP7-ICT-248036, project COAST.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-13" href="#section-13">13</a>.  References</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-13.1" href="#section-13.1">13.1</a>.  Normative References</span>

   [<a id="ref-H.264">H.264</a>]    ITU-T Recommendation H.264, "Advanced video coding for
              generic audiovisual services", March 2010.




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 97]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-98" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   [<a id="ref-RFC6184">RFC6184</a>]  Wang, Y.-K., Even, R., Kristensen, T., and R. Jesup, "RTP
              Payload Format for H.264 Video", <a href="./rfc6184">RFC 6184</a>, May 2011.

   [ISO/IEC14496-10]
              ISO/IEC International Standard 14496-10:2005.

   [<a id="ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.

   [<a id="ref-RFC3264">RFC3264</a>]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", <a href="./rfc3264">RFC 3264</a>, June
              2002.

   [<a id="ref-RFC3550">RFC3550</a>]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, <a href="./rfc3550">RFC 3550</a>, July 2003.

   [<a id="ref-RFC4288">RFC4288</a>]  Freed, N. and J. Klensin, "Media Type Specifications and
              Registration Procedures", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp13">BCP 13</a>, <a href="./rfc4288">RFC 4288</a>, December 2005.

   [<a id="ref-RFC4566">RFC4566</a>]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
              Description Protocol", <a href="./rfc4566">RFC 4566</a>, July 2006.

   [<a id="ref-RFC4648">RFC4648</a>]  Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
              Encodings", <a href="./rfc4648">RFC 4648</a>, October 2006.

   [<a id="ref-RFC5576">RFC5576</a>]  Lennox, J., Ott, J., and T. Schierl, "Source-Specific
              Media Attributes in the Session Description Protocol
              (SDP)", <a href="./rfc5576">RFC 5576</a>, June 2009.

   [<a id="ref-RFC5583">RFC5583</a>]  Schierl, T. and S. Wenger, "Signaling Media Decoding
              Dependency in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", <a href="./rfc5583">RFC</a>
              <a href="./rfc5583">5583</a>, July 2009.

   [<a id="ref-RFC6051">RFC6051</a>]  Perkins, C. and T. Schierl, "Rapid Synchronisation of RTP
              Flows", <a href="./rfc6051">RFC 6051</a>, November 2010.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-13.2" href="#section-13.2">13.2</a>.  Informative References</span>

   [<a id="ref-DVB-H">DVB-H</a>]    DVB - Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); DVB-H
              Implementation Guidelines, ETSI TR 102 377, 2005.

   [<a id="ref-Eleft">Eleft</a>]    Eleftheriadis, A., R. Civanlar, and O. Shapiro,
              "Multipoint Videoconferencing with Scalable Video Coding",
              Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A, Vol. 7, Nr. 5,
              April 2006, pp. 696-705. (Proceedings of the Packet Video
              2006 Workshop.)




<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 98]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-99" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


   [<a id="ref-G.114">G.114</a>]    ITU-T Rec. G.114, "One-way transmission time", May 2003.

   [<a id="ref-H.241">H.241</a>]    ITU-T Rec. H.241, "Extended video procedures and control
              signals for H.300-series terminals", May 2006.

   [<a id="ref-IGMP">IGMP</a>]     Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.
              Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
              3", <a href="./rfc3376">RFC 3376</a>, October 2002.

   [<a id="ref-JVT-N026">JVT-N026</a>] Ohm J.-R., Koenen, R., and Chiariglione, L. (ed.), "SVC
              requirements specified by MPEG (ISO/IEC JTC1 SC29 WG11)",
              JVT-N026, available from <a href="http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N026.doc">http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/</a>
              <a href="http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N026.doc">jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N026.doc</a>, Hong Kong, China,
              January 2005.

   [<a id="ref-JVT-N027">JVT-N027</a>] Sullivan, G. and Wiegand, T. (ed.), "SVC requirements
              specified by VCEG (ITU-T SG16 Q.6)", JVT-N027, available
              from <a href="http://ftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N027.doc">http://ftp3.itu.int/av-arch/</a>
              <a href="http://ftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N027.doc">jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JVT-N027.doc</a>, Hong Kong, China,
              January 2005.

   [<a id="ref-McCanne">McCanne</a>]  McCanne, S., Jacobson, V., and Vetterli, M., "Receiver-
              driven layered multicast", in Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM'96,
              pages 117-130, Stanford, CA, August 1996.

   [<a id="ref-MBMS">MBMS</a>]     3GPP - Technical Specification Group Services and System
              Aspects; Multimedia Broadcast/Multicast Service (MBMS);
              Protocols and codecs (Release 6), December 2005.

   [<a id="ref-MPEG2">MPEG2</a>]    ISO/IEC International Standard 13818-2:1993.

   [<a id="ref-RFC2326">RFC2326</a>]  Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., and R. Lanphier, "Real Time
              Streaming Protocol (RTSP)", <a href="./rfc2326">RFC 2326</a>, April 1998.

   [<a id="ref-RFC2974">RFC2974</a>]  Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session
              Announcement Protocol", <a href="./rfc2974">RFC 2974</a>, October 2000.

   [<a id="ref-RFC5117">RFC5117</a>]  Westerlund, M. and S. Wenger, "RTP Topologies", <a href="./rfc5117">RFC 5117</a>,
              January 2008.

   [<a id="ref-RFC5775">RFC5775</a>]  Luby, M., Watson, M., and L. Vicisano, "Asynchronous
              Layered Coding (ALC) Protocol Instantiation", <a href="./rfc5775">RFC 5775</a>,
              April 2010.

   [<a id="ref-Yan">Yan</a>]      Yan, J., Katrinis, K., May, M., and Plattner, R., "Media-
              and TCP-friendly congestion control for scalable video
              streams", in IEEE Trans. Multimedia, pages 196-206, April
              2006.



<span class="grey">Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 99]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-100" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6190">RFC 6190</a>               RTP Payload Format for SVC               May 2011</span>


Authors' Addresses

   Stephan Wenger
   2400 Skyfarm Dr.
   Hillsborough, CA 94010
   USA

   Phone: +1-415-713-5473
   EMail: stewe@stewe.org


   Ye-Kui Wang
   Huawei Technologies
   400 Crossing Blvd, 2nd Floor
   Bridgewater, NJ 08807
   USA

   Phone: +1-908-541-3518
   EMail: yekui.wang@huawei.com


   Thomas Schierl
   Fraunhofer HHI
   Einsteinufer 37
   D-10587 Berlin
   Germany

   Phone: +49-30-31002-227
   EMail: ts@thomas-schierl.de


   Alex Eleftheriadis
   Vidyo, Inc.
   433 Hackensack Ave.
   Hackensack, NJ 07601
   USA

   Phone: +1-201-467-5135
   EMail: alex@vidyo.com












Wenger, et al.               Standards Track                  [Page 100]
</pre>