AVT D. Singer Internet-Draft Apple Computer Inc. Expires: April 14, 2007 October 11, 2006 Associating Time-codes with RTP streams draft-ietf-avt-smpte-rtp-05.txt Status of this Memo 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 becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 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 April 14, 2007. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Abstract This document describes a mechanism for associating time-codes, as defined by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), with media streams, in a way that is independent of the RTP payload format of the media stream itself. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 1] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Signaling (setup) information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. In-stream information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.1. Compact Format of the Time-code . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2. Full Format of the Time-code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.3. Associations in RTCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.4. Associations in RTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Implementation Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 10. RFC Editor Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix B. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 11. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 20 Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 2] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 1. Introduction First a brief background on Time-codes [SMPTE-12M]. The time-code system in common use is defined by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), and in it, time- codes count frames. There are two common forms of display: either a simple counter, or what looks like a normal clock value (hh:mm: ss.frame). When the frame rate is truly integer, then this can be a normal clock value, in that seconds tick by at the same rate as the seconds we know and love. However, NTSC video infamously runs slightly slower than 30 frames/ second. Some people call it 29.97 (which isn't quite right) and some say that a frame takes 1001 ticks of a 30000 tick/second clock (which is closer). Be that as it may, SMPTE time codes count 30 of these frames and deem that to make a second. This causes a SMPTE time-code display to 'run slow' compared to real- time. To ameliorate this, sometimes a format called drop-frame is used. Some of the frame numbers are skipped, so that the counter periodically 'catches up' (so some time-code-seconds actually only have 28 frames in them). It is worth noting that in neither case is the SMPTE time-code an accurate clock; in the first case, it runs slow, and in the second, the adjustments are abrupt and periodic - and still not quite accurate. Hence the rest of this document tries to be clear when referring to a second in a time-code as a 'time-code second'. However, SMPTE time-codes do run in real-time when used with systems with integral frames/second (e.g. film content at 24 frames/second, or PAL video). This specification enables the carriage of time-codes in RTP and RTCP, associating them with a media stream, and synchronizing the time-codes with the RTP time-stamps. It uses the general RTP header extension mechanism [hdrext]. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 3] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 2. Requirements notation 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]. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 4] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 3. Design Goals What we desire is a system that allows us to associate a SMPTE time- code with some media in an RTP [RFC3550] stream. Since in RTP all media has a clock already, we can often leverage that fact. If we treat the media as having 'segments' of time in which the time-code is simply counting up, then the time-code anywhere within a segment can be calculated if you know: o the RTP timestamp of the start of the segment; o the time-code of the start of the segment; o the counting rate and other parameters of the time-code; o the RTP timestamp where you want to know the time-code. There are two cases to consider: 1. the time-codes are piece-wise continuous with only occasional discontinuities; 2. the continuity of the time-codes is not certain (or not known). The first can be handled by providing details of the time-code axis and an initial mapping from RTP time to time-code time, and periodic mappings in RTCP packets. The second requires in-band signaling within the RTP packets themselves. Both cases are covered by this specification. There are applications where the transport of all 8 bytes of the SMPTE 12M timecode are important (e.g. when the date of the time-code must be known, or when the RTP transport is used as a transparent pipe). On the other hand, there are cases (e.g. when timecodes are used with compressed audio) when bandwidth is also important. To support both use cases, provision is made for both compact and full forms of the time-code. Receivers MUST support timecodes in both RTCP and RTP, and both forms (compact and full) of the time-code. Senders, of course, are free to choose. Note that the compact form allows frame numbers greater than the full form (a field of 6 bits vs. a full BCD digit and a 2-bit BCD digit, which gives a maximum transmitted value of 29). In some cases, the Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 5] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 color frame flag (bit 11) is used to 'extend' the tens of frames field from 2 to 3 bits; however, such practices are outside the scope of this specification. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 6] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 4. Signaling (setup) information If the recipient must ever calculate time-codes based on the RTP times, then some setup information is needed. This MUST be sent out- of-band, for example in a SIP offer/answer exchange. Since this is a general header extension [hdrext], appropriate signaling for those header extensions should be used. The setup information should include: 1. the duration, in the RTP timescale, of a single frame-count in the 'frames' portion of the time-code (frame_duration) 2. the number of those frames that make a time-code-second (frames_per_tc_second); framecounter values may be between 0 and (frames_per_tc_second - 1) 3. is-NTSC-drop-frame: should the usual 'left out numbers' of drop- frame be applied or not? Note that other information we need to do the calculation (e.g. the clock rate of the RTP timestamp) is supplied already and assumed to be available. For example, if associated with a video track with the common time- scale of 90000, then frame-duration of 3003 and frames-per-tc-second of 30 would yield a 'normal' SMPTE time-code for NTSC video. Similarly values of 3750 and 24 yield a time-code for 24 fps film content, and so on. Note also that we supply explicitly the frame duration and frames/ second, even though they are obviously closely related. These removes any ambiguity of what the counter values should be in the case of drop-frame counting. These three values MUST correspond with each other. When SDP is used, these three parameters are transmitted as extensionattributes, as defined in the header extension specification [hdrext], with the following syntax. The form of the extension attributes is 'owned' by the extension name. These parameters to the extension do not need registration action beyond their documentation here. Note that the parameters are supplied as extension attributes, suitable for in-line use in RTP, even if in a given stream only the RTCP mapping is used. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 7] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 digit = "0"|"1"|"2"|"3"|"4"|"5"|"6"|"7"|"8"|"9" integer = digit *(digit) frameduration = integer framespersecond = integer drop = "/drop" | extensionattributes = frameduration "/" framespersecond drop If '/drop' is specified, then the first two frame numbers are omitted from the count of each minute, except for minutes 00, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, as documented in SMPTE specification [SMPTE-12M] section 4.2.2. The URI used for the signaling is "http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfcXXXX.txt". This URI signals the possible presence of associations in RTCP or RTP, as defined below. An example in SDP, on a stream with a timescale of 600, might be a=extmap:4 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfcXXXX.txt 20/30 Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 8] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 5. In-stream information 5.1. Compact Format of the Time-code A compact binary SMPTE time-code in this design occupies 24 bits. It is NOT formatted in the BCD system, but uses binary fixed-width fields. It has the following structure: sign(1) -- 1 for negative, 0 for positive hours (5 bits) -- 0 to 23; the values 24-31 are reserved minutes (6 bits) -- 0 to 59; 60-63 are reserved seconds (6 bits) -- 0 to 59; 60-63 are reserved frames(6 bits) -- 0 to (frames-per-tc-second - 1) Note that these fields are larger than the provision in SMPTE 12M where binary-coded decimal is used (and notably, where only two bits are provided for the tens digit of the frame count, so frame numbers above 39 cannot be represented). 5.2. Full Format of the Time-code A full binary SMPTE time-code occupies 64 bits. It is formatted exactly as in SMPTE 12M [SMPTE-12M]. 5.3. Associations in RTCP When the time-codes are piece-wise continuous, we then supply in RTCP packets an RTP timestamp and an SMPTE time-code, for the start of each run of calculable time-codes. This establishes the time-code for all RTP times greater than or equal to the one given, until a subsequent RTCP packet reestablishes the mapping. Note that the RTP time-stamp in the RTCP mapping may not match the time-stamp of any frame in the media stream. For video, it normally would; but a time-stamp transition may happen part-way through a decoded audio frame. Since they share the same clock, the timing of that transition and the timing of the audio stream itself have the same accuracy. The association is a new RTCP Control Packet Type, using the value 194 (see section 9). This control packet has one of the two following forms, differentiated by its length: Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 9] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |V=2|P| SC |PT=SMPTETC=194 | length=3 | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | SSRC of packet sender | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | RTP timestamp | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |S| hours | minutes | seconds | frames | reserved=0 | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ The fields S (sign), hours, minutes, seconds, and frames, are defined above. For this short form, the length takes the fixed value 3, indicating a control packet of 4 32-bit words. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |V=2|P| SC |PT=SMPTETC=194 | length=4 | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | SSRC of packet sender | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | RTP timestamp | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | Full 8-byte | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SMPTE 12M timecode | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ For this full time-code, long form, the length takes the fixed value 4, indicating a control packet of 5 32-bit words. 5.4. Associations in RTP When the time-codes are not known to be piece-wise continuous, or absolute surety of mapping is desired, then the mapping can be placed into some or all of the RTP packets. This is a less desirable route; it uses the RTP header extension, which some terminals may find problematic. And clearly placing mapping information in every packet uses more bandwidth. In as many RTP packets as needed (possibly all), a RTP header Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 10] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 extension is used [hdrext] to associate an RTP time to a SMPTE time- code. There are two forms of this header extension, again differentiated by their length. The short form associates a compact time-code with the RTP timestamp of the packet. The long form allows associates a full time-code with a timestamp offset from the RTP timestamp of the packet. The short form has a length of 3 bytes (24 bits). The long form has a length of 12 bytes (96 bits), and consists of a full SMPTE 12M time-code, followed by a signed 32-bit offset D from the RTP timestamp. If the packet has timestamp T, this establishes an RTP to time-code association for the RTP time T+D. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 11] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 6. Implementation Note This section contains a suggestion on how to calculate a time-code for a time T2, given an initial code at time T1, and the frame duration It might seem that when drop-frame is used, there is a 'fence post' problem: how many minutes in which frame-numbers are dropped have past since the initial time-code? However, this can be avoided if all calculations are 'zero-based'; then the number of 'fence posts' is known. framesSinceTCzero := TimeCodeToFrameCount( initialTimeCode ); framesSinceMapping := floor( (T2-T1)/frameDuration ); totalFrames := framesSinceTCzero + framesSinceMapping; timeCode := FrameCountToTimeCode( totalFrames ); Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 12] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 7. Discussion This design has the advantage of not requiring the introduction of new IP packets into the sessions or new data into the main data channel, using low-bandwidth (vanishingly low in the case of streams with no discontinuities), and is independent of the design of the RTP packets themselves: the RTP profile (including possibly encryption) and the RTP payload format. SMPTE time-codes can be associated with any RTP stream, including those with existing payload formats. It might be argued that we could set the initial mapping also in the SDP, since RTCP packets might get lost. But this means that the SDP now has to have knowledge of the RTP random offset, which is nasty; and if one puts this RTCP packet into all sender reports, it's probably good enough. Then if you don't have time-codes, you don't have audio-video-sync either. This associates the time-code with a particular media stream. An alternative would be to make it an RTP stream in its own right; but the data rate is so low, this seems egregious. And by packing it inline, we can do this backwards-compatible for gateways etc. that already handle dual-stream. The RTCP packets (or the in-band codes) need not use the same RTP timestamp as the sender report (or transmission time) in the same RTCP packet. They can be sent 'ahead of need' if possible (e.g. for stored content, when the server can look-ahead) or just-in-time - sent as early feedback packets, for example following the rules in [feedback], after a discontinuity in the time-code is detected, and allow media-buffering in the client the chance to 'catch' the RTCP before the matching RTP packet is processed and displayed. There is no way in this draft to detect that an RTCP packet has been lost, and that a mapping may be being used outside its intended range. The design assumes that clients will hold mappings until they are superseded, and that a client may need to buffer some number of upcoming mappings. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 13] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 8. Security Considerations SMPTE time-codes are only informative and it is hard to see security considerations from associating them with media streams. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 14] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 9. IANA Considerations The RTCP packet type used for SMPTE time-code needs to be registered, in accordance with section 15 of [RFC3550]. The abbreviation is "SMPTETC", the full name is "SMPTE time-code mapping", the suggested value is 194, and the specification is this document. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 15] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 10. RFC Editor Considerations The reference to an Internet Draft needs to be updated to the RFC when it is published (which should be before this draft). The RFC number of this document needs to replace XXXX in the text above, before publication. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 16] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 Appendix A. Acknowledgments Both Brian Link and John Lazzaro provided helpful comments on an initial draft. Colin Perkins was helpful in reviewing and dealing with the details. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 17] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 Appendix B. Change History o August 2005: 00 Draft-avt-smpte-rtp made from draft-singer-smpte-rtp; added question on full time-code option o January 2006: 01 Updated to XML2RFC; inserted BNF, documented SDP usage, changed the name to org.ietf..., other cleanup o June 2006: 02 Allowed both compact and full time-codes in both RTCP and inline o June 2006: 03 Minor clarifications, provided signalling example, clarified that the same signalling is used for both RTCP and/or RTP use o August 2006: 04 many cleanups, thanks to Colin for the careful read o October 2006: 05 Changed to URI signalling 11. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", RFC 3550, STD 0064, July 2003. [SMPTE-12M] Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, "Television, Audio and Film - Time and Control Code", SMPTE 12M-1999. [feedback] Singer, D., "A general mechanism for RTP Header Extensions", ID draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-feedback-11, August 2006. [hdrext] Singer, D., "A general mechanism for RTP Header Extensions", ID draft-ietf-avt-rtp-hdrext-06, October 2006. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 18] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 Author's Address David Singer Apple Computer Inc. 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino, CA 95014 US Phone: +1 408 996 1010 Email: singer@apple.com Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 19] Internet-Draft RTP SMPTE Time-codes October 2006 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 (2006). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Singer Expires April 14, 2007 [Page 20]