Internet DRAFT - draft-dawkins-avtcore-sdp-rtp-quic
draft-dawkins-avtcore-sdp-rtp-quic
AVTCORE Working Group S. Dawkins
Internet-Draft Tencent America LLC
Intended status: Standards Track 28 January 2022
Expires: 1 August 2022
SDP Offer/Answer for RTP using QUIC as Transport
draft-dawkins-avtcore-sdp-rtp-quic-00
Abstract
This document describes these new SDP "proto" attribute values:
"QUIC", "QUIC/RTP/SAVP", "QUIC/RTP/AVPF", and "QUIC/RTP/SAVPF", and
describes how SDP Offer/Answer can be used to set up an RTP
connection using QUIC as a transport protocol.
These proto values are necessary to allow the use of QUIC as an
underlying transport protocol for applications such as SIP and WebRTC
that commonly use SDP as a session signaling protocol to set up RTP
connections.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 1 August 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) 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
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Notes for Readers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Scope of this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4. Contribution and Discussion Venues for this draft. . . . 3
1.5. Assumptions for this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5.1. An Aside on Secure AVP Profiles in an RTP Over QUIC
Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.6. Open Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Identifiers and Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1. Protocol Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1. The QUIC proto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2. The QUIC/RTP/SAVP proto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.3. The QUIC/RTP/AVPF proto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.4. The QUIC/RTP/SAVPF proto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2. A QUIC/RTP/AVPF Offer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.1. Proto Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
This document describes these new SDP "proto" attribute values:
"QUIC", "QUIC/RTP/SAVP", "QUIC/RTP/AVPF", and "QUIC/RTP/SAVPF", and
describes how SDP Offer/Answer ([RFC3264]) can be used to set up an
RTP ([RFC3550]) connection using QUIC ([RFC9000] and related
specifications) as a transport protocol.
These proto values are necessary to allow the use of QUIC as an
underlying transport protocol for applications such as SIP
([RFC3261]) and WebRTC ([RFC8825]) that commonly use SDP as a session
signaling protocol to set up RTP connections.
1.1. Notes for Readers
(Note to RFC Editor - if this document ever reaches you, please
remove this section)
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
This document is intended for publication as a standards-track RFC in
the IETF stream, but has not been adopted by any IETF working group,
and does not carry any special status within the IETF.
1.2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 ([RFC2119]) ([RFC8174]) when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
1.3. Scope of this document
This document focuses on the IANA registration and description of the
RTP sessions using SDP Offer/Answer, as would be the case for many
current RTP applications in common use, such as SIP ([RFC3261]) and
WebRTC ([RFC8825]).
This document is intended as complementary to drafts such as
[I-D.engelbart-rtp-over-quic], which largely focus on RTP/RTCP
encapsulation in QUIC, so that the SDP experts can focus on SDP
offer/answer aspects, and the RTP experts can focus on RTP/RTCP
encapsulation aspects.
1.4. Contribution and Discussion Venues for this draft.
(Note to RFC Editor - if this document ever reaches you, please
remove this section)
With the concurrence of the AVTCORE and MMUSIC working group co-
chairs, this document should be discussed in the AVTCORE working
group, in the same venue where RTP over QUIC proposals are being
discussed. When proposals for RTP over SIP have stablized in
AVTCORE, this document will be sent to the MMUSIC working group for
review by SDP experts, but SDP-specific comments are welcomed at any
time.
Readers are also invited to open issues and send pull requests with
contributed text for this document in the GitHub repository at
https://github.com/SpencerDawkins/sdp-rtp-quic. The direct link to
the list of issues is https://github.com/SpencerDawkins/sdp-rtp-quic/
issues.
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
1.5. Assumptions for this document
This document assumes that for RTP-over-QUIC, it is useful to
register these AVP profiles using QUIC, in order to allow existing
SIP and RTCWEB RTP applications to migrate more easily to QUIC:
* RTP/SAVP ("The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)"), as
defined in [RFC3711].
* RTP/AVPF ("Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)"), as defined in
[RFC4585].
* RTP/SAVPF ("Extended Secure RTP Profile for Real-time Transport
Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/SAVPF)"), as defined
in [RFC5124].
This document assumes that any implementation adding support for RTP-
over-QUIC could reasonably also add support for BUNDLE ([RFC8843])
and "rtcp-mux" ([RFC5761]), so these capabiilities are not mentioned
further in this document.
1.5.1. An Aside on Secure AVP Profiles in an RTP Over QUIC Context
Existing RTP implementations have the choice for any given RTP
connection to exchange either unencrypted RTP streams (using AVP
profiles such as RTP/AVPF) or encrypted RTP streams (using AVP
profiles such as RTP/SAVPF).
An RTP implementation that uses QUIC as its underlying transport
protocol will always send an RTP stream that is encrypted between the
two QUIC endpoints, so some RTP implementations may be tempted to
exchange unencrypted RTP as an encrypted QUIC payload, reasoning that
QUIC protection will be sufficient.
One nuance here is that QUIC is heavily encrypted between two QUIC
endpoints, with the very minimal exception of the invariant header
fields described in [RFC8999], but as described in [RFC7667], many
RTP applications use middleboxes for a variety of reasons, and some
of these topologies (for example, media translation) require that the
middlebox understand the RTP payload.
These middleboxes are explictly addressed, and the QUIC cryptographic
handshake described in [RFC9001] takes place between the RTP endpoint
and the RTP middlebox. After the QUIC cryptographic handshake has
succeeded, the RTP middlebox has access to the RTP in the QUIC
payload, and can perform whatever translations are appropriate before
forwarding the RTP steam to another RTP endpoint. However, if the
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
RTP sender uses one of the "insecure" AVPs, the middlebox does not
have any indication that the RTP sender wants the translated RTP
stream to be protected by encryption when the middlebox forwards it.
That might be fine if the middlebox and RTP endpoint are both using
RTP over QUIC, but if the middlebox is performing transport
translation as well, the middlebox may also be translating an RTP-
over-QUIC stream to RTP-over-UDP.
This specification tries to provide that indication by supporting
both "secure" and "insecure" AVPs for RTP over QUIC, so the middlebox
that is providing back-to-back RTP sessions as described in [RFC7667]
can be aware of the sender's desire that a translated RTP stream is
encypted regardless of the underlying transport protocol, without
always requiring both SRTP and QUIC encryption between each pair of
QUIC endpoints for all RTP traffic. That's one strategy, and it's
certainly possible that other strategies might be safer, cleaner,
and/or more useful.
1.6. Open Questions
The current contents of Section 2 and Section 3 would allow an
existing RTP/RTCP implementation to make a relatively straightforward
transition from "RTP over UDP" to "RTP over QUIC datagrams over UDP",
and likewise from "RTCP over UDP" to "RTCP over QUIC datagrams over
UDP".
Although it is still early days for RTP over QUIC, things may not be
that straightforward. Just limiting our attention to various
proposals for "RTP over QUIC" that have already been discussed on the
Media Over QUIC IETF mailing list [MOQ] and in various IETF side
meetings, we have seen
* a desire to make use of QUIC connection migration in case of path
failure between two endpoints
* a desire to replace RTP Round Trip Time (RTT) measurement with
something like a proposed QUIC extension for timestamps
([I-D.huitema-quic-ts]) that could be used to measure one-way
delays
* a desire to make use of QUIC streams, potentially with QUIC
datagrams in the same QUIC connection
* a desire to decouple the RTP state machine and the QUIC state
machine, which currently assume they are solely responsible for
managing sending rates, without any knowledge of what the other
plans to do
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
* a desire to select a media-focused congestion control mechanism
such as "Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation for Multimedia", or SCReAM
([RFC8298]), that can be included in QUIC implementations
* a desire to use RTP over QUIC in peer-to-peer applications, which
likely would require extensions to the QUIC protocol for NAT
traversal, at a bare minimum
Changes to the SDP signaling in Section 2 and Section 3 may be (and
likely would be) needed in order to support any of these desires (or
other desires that may surface in the future).
2. Identifiers and Attributes
As much as possible, these are reused from other specifications, with
references to the original definitions.
2.1. Protocol Identifiers
2.1.1. The QUIC proto
The 'QUIC' protocol identifier is similar to the 'UDP' and 'TCP'
protocol identifiers in that it only describes the transport
protocol, and not the upper-layer protocol.
An 'm' line that specifies 'QUIC' MUST further qualify the
application-layer protocol using an fmt identifier, such as
"QUIC/RTP/AVPF". Media described using an 'm' line containing the
'QUIC' protocol identifier are carried using QUIC ([RFC9000]).
The following is an update to the ABNF for an 'm' line, as specified
by [RFC8866], that defines a new value for the QUIC protocol.
media-field = %s"m" "=" media SP port \["/" integer\]
SP proto 1*(SP fmt) CRLF
m= line parameter parameter value(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
<media>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
<proto>: 'QUIC'
<port>: UDP port number
<fmt>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
2.1.2. The QUIC/RTP/SAVP proto
The following is an update to the ABNF for an 'm' line, as specified
by [RFC8866], that defines a new value for the QUIC/RTP/SAVP
protocol.
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
media-field = %s"m" "=" media SP port \["/" integer\]
SP proto 1*(SP fmt) CRLF
m= line parameter parameter value(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
<media>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
<proto>: 'QUIC/RTP/SAVP'
<port>: UDP port number
<fmt>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
2.1.3. The QUIC/RTP/AVPF proto
The following is an update to the ABNF for an 'm' line, as specified
by [RFC8866], that defines a new value for the QUIC/RTP/AVPF
protocol.
media-field = %s"m" "=" media SP port \["/" integer\]
SP proto 1*(SP fmt) CRLF
m= line parameter parameter value(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
<media>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
<proto>: 'QUIC/RTP/AVPF'
<port>: UDP port number
<fmt>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
2.1.4. The QUIC/RTP/SAVPF proto
The following is an update to the ABNF for an 'm' line, as specified
by [RFC8866], that defines a new value for the QUIC/RTP/SAVPF
protocol.
media-field = %s"m" "=" media SP port \["/" integer\]
SP proto 1*(SP fmt) CRLF
m= line parameter parameter value(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
<media>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
<proto>: 'QUIC/RTP/SAVPF'
<port>: UDP port number
<fmt>: (unchanged from {{RFC8866}})
2.2. A QUIC/RTP/AVPF Offer
A complete example of an SDP offer using QUIC/RTP/AVPF might look
like:
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
+================================+=================================+
| SDP line | Notes |
+================================+=================================+
| v=0 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| o=jdoe 3724394400 3724394405 | Same as [RFC8866] |
| IN IP4 198.51.100.1 | |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| s=Call to John Smith | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| i=SDP Offer #1 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| u=http://www.jdoe.example.com/ | Same as [RFC8866] |
| home.html | |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| e=Jane Doe | Same as [RFC8866] |
| jane@jdoe.example.com | |
| (mailto:jane@jdoe.example.com) | |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| p=+1 617 555-6011 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| c=IN IP4 198.51.100.1 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| t=0 0 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| m=audio 49180 RTP/AVP 0 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| m=video 51372 QUIC/RTP/AVPF 99 | QUIC transport |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| a=setup:passive | will wait for QUIC handshake |
| | (setup attribute from |
| | [RFC4145]) |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| a=connection:new | don't want to reuse an existing |
| | QUIC connection (connection |
| | attribute from [RFC4145]) |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| c=IN IP6 2001:db8::2 | Same as [RFC8866] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| a=rtpmap:99 h266/90000 | H.266 VVC codec |
| | [I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-vvc] |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Table 1
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
This example is largely based on an example appearing in [RFC8866],
Section 5, but is using QUIC/RTP/AVPF to support a newer codec.
Because QUIC uses connections for both streams and datagrams, we are
reusing two session- and media-level SDP attributes from
[SDP-attribute-name] that were defined in [RFC4145] for use with TCP:
setup and connection.
This example SDP offer might be included in a SIP Invite.
3. IANA Considerations
This document registers these protocols in the proto registry
([SDP-parameters]).
* QUIC (Section 2.1.1)
* QUIC/RTP/SAVP (Section 2.1.2)
* QUIC/RTP/AVPF (Section 2.1.3)
* QUIC/RTP/SAVPF (Section 2.1.4)
3.1. Proto Registrations
IANA is requested to add these protocols to the Session Description
Protocol (SDP) Parameters proto registry ([SDP-parameters]).
+=======+================+===========+
| Type | SDP Name | Reference |
+=======+================+===========+
| proto | QUIC | RFCXXXX |
+-------+----------------+-----------+
| proto | QUIC/RTP/SAVP | RFCXXXX |
+-------+----------------+-----------+
| proto | QUIC/RTP/AVPF | RFCXXXX |
+-------+----------------+-----------+
| proto | QUIC/RTP/SAVPF | RFCXXXX |
+-------+----------------+-----------+
Table 2
*Note to the RFC Editor*
Please replace "RFCXXXX" with the assigned RFC number, when that is
available, and remove this note.
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
4. Security Considerations
Security considerations for the QUIC protocol are described in the
corresponding section in [RFC9000].
Security considerations for the TLS handshake used to secure QUIC are
described in [RFC9001].
Security considerations for SDP are described in the corresponding
section in [RFC8866].
Security considerations for SDP offer/answer are described in the
cooresponding section in [RFC3264].
5. Acknowledgments
My appreciation to the authors of [RFC4145], which served as a model
for the initial structure of this document.
Thanks to these folks for helping to improve this draft:
* Colin Perkins
(Your name also could appear here. Please comment and contribute, as
per Section 1.4).
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[MOQ] "Moq -- Media over QUIC", n.d.,
<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/moq>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3261>.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3264>.
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
July 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3550>.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3711>.
[RFC4585] Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey,
"Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4585, July 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4585>.
[RFC5124] Ott, J. and E. Carrara, "Extended Secure RTP Profile for
Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback
(RTP/SAVPF)", RFC 5124, DOI 10.17487/RFC5124, February
2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5124>.
[RFC5761] Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Multiplexing RTP Data and
Control Packets on a Single Port", RFC 5761,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5761, April 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5761>.
[RFC7667] Westerlund, M. and S. Wenger, "RTP Topologies", RFC 7667,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7667, November 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7667>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8298] Johansson, I. and Z. Sarker, "Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation
for Multimedia", RFC 8298, DOI 10.17487/RFC8298, December
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8298>.
[RFC8825] Alvestrand, H., "Overview: Real-Time Protocols for
Browser-Based Applications", RFC 8825,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8825, January 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8825>.
[RFC8843] Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings,
"Negotiating Media Multiplexing Using the Session
Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 8843,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8843, January 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8843>.
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
[RFC8866] Begen, A., Kyzivat, P., Perkins, C., and M. Handley, "SDP:
Session Description Protocol", RFC 8866,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8866, January 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8866>.
[RFC8999] Thomson, M., "Version-Independent Properties of QUIC",
RFC 8999, DOI 10.17487/RFC8999, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8999>.
[RFC9000] Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based
Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000>.
[RFC9001] Thomson, M., Ed. and S. Turner, Ed., "Using TLS to Secure
QUIC", RFC 9001, DOI 10.17487/RFC9001, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9001>.
[SDP-attribute-name]
"SDP Parameters - attribute-name", September 2021,
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-
parameters.xhtml#sdp-att-field>.
[SDP-parameters]
"SDP Parameters - Proto", September 2021,
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-
parameters.xhtml#sdp-parameters-2>.
6.2. Informative References
[I-D.engelbart-rtp-over-quic]
Ott, J. and M. Engelbart, "RTP over QUIC", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-engelbart-rtp-over-quic-
01, 25 October 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-engelbart-
rtp-over-quic-01>.
[I-D.huitema-quic-ts]
Huitema, C., "Quic Timestamps For Measuring One-Way
Delays", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-huitema-
quic-ts-06, 12 September 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-huitema-quic-
ts-06>.
[I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-vvc]
Zhao, S., Wenger, S., Sanchez, Y., Wang, Y., and M. M.
Hannuksela, "RTP Payload Format for Versatile Video Coding
(VVC)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft SDP O/A for RTP over QUIC January 2022
avtcore-rtp-vvc-13, 18 November 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-
rtp-vvc-13>.
[RFC4145] Yon, D. and G. Camarillo, "TCP-Based Media Transport in
the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4145,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4145, September 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4145>.
Author's Address
Spencer Dawkins
Tencent America LLC
United States of America
Email: spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com
Dawkins Expires 1 August 2022 [Page 13]
