AVT R. Even Internet-Draft Polycom Expires: July 28, 2005 January 27, 2005 RTP Payload Format for H.263 using RFC2190 to Historic status draft-ietf-avt-rfc2190-to-historic-01.txt Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions of section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 28, 2005. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Abstract The first RFC that describes RTP payload format for H.263 is RFC2190. This specification discusses why to move this RFC to historic status. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 1] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 8 Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 2] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 1. Introduction The ITU-T recommendation H.263[H263] specifies the encoding used by ITU-T compliant video-conference codecs. The first version (version 1) was approved in 1996 by the ITU and a payload format for encapsulating this H.263 bitstream in the Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) is in RFC-2190[RFC2190] In 1998 the ITU approved a new version of H.263 [H263] that is also known as H.263 plus. This version added optional features and a new payload format is now in RFC-2429.[RFC2429] RFC-2429 is capable of carrying encoded video bit steams that are using only the basic H.263 version 1 options. RFC-2429 [RFC2429] states that it does not replace RFC 2190, which continues to be used by existing implementations, and may be required for backward compatibility in new implementations. Implementations using the new features of the 1998 version of H.263 shall use the format described in this document. RFC-2429 is now being revised and will now include a language that will make it clear that all new implementations MUST use the new RFC for encoding any version of H.263. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 3] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 2. Terminology 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 RFC2119[RFC2119] and indicate requirement levels for compliant RTP implementations. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 4] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 3. Recommendation RFC-2429 and the its updates can be used to carry new H.263 payload even if they are using only the features defined in the the 1996 version. All the H.263 features that are part of the 1996 version are also part of the 1998 version. It is recommended that RFC-2190 will be moved to historic status and that as stated in RFC-2429 new implementations will use RFC-2429 and the H263-1998 and H263-2000 MIME subtypes. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 5] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 4. IANA Considerations The section updates the previous registered version of the H263 payload type in RFC 3555[RFC3555]. The document request to move the H263 payload type to historic state. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 6] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 5. Security Considerations None 6 Normative References [H263] International Telecommunications Union, "Video coding for low bit rate communication", ITU Recommendation H.263, March 1996. [H263P] International Telecommunications Union, "Video coding for low bit rate communication", ITU Recommendation H.263P, February 1998. [RFC2048] Freed, N., Klensin, J. and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", BCP 13, RFC 2048, November 1996. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC2190] Zhu, C., "RTP Payload Format for H.263 Video Streams", RFC 2190, September 1997. [RFC2429] Bormann, C., Cline, L., Deisher, G., Gardos, T., Maciocco, C., Newell, D., Ott, J., Sullivan, G., Wenger, S. and C. Zhu, "RTP Payload Format for the 1998 Version of ITU-T Rec. H.263 Video (H.263+)", RFC 2429, October 1998. [RFC3555] Casner, S. and P. Hoschka, "MIME Type Registration of RTP Payload Formats", RFC 3555, July 2003. [Vredun] Wenger, S., "Video Redundancy Coding in H.263+", Proc. Audio-Visual Services over Packet Networks, Aberdeen, U.K. 9/1997, September 1997. Author's Address Roni Even Polycom 94 Derech Em Hamoshavot Petach Tikva 49130 Israel EMail: roni.even@polycom.co.il Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 7] Internet-Draft RFC2190 to Historic January 2005 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Disclaimer of Validity This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Even Expires July 28, 2005 [Page 8]