Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-payload-rfc3016bis-01.txt> (RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4 Audio/Visual Streams) to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 09:08:21 -0700

The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport Payloads
WG (payload) to consider the following document:
- 'RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4 Audio/Visual Streams'
  <draft-ietf-payload-rfc3016bis-01.txt> as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2011-06-22. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract

   This document describes Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) payload
   formats for carrying each of MPEG-4 Audio and MPEG-4 Visual
   bitstreams without using MPEG-4 Systems.  For the purpose of directly
   mapping MPEG-4 Audio/Visual bitstreams onto RTP packets, it provides
   specifications for the use of RTP header fields and also specifies
   fragmentation rules.  It also provides specifications for Media Type
   registration and the use of Session Description Protocol (SDP).  The
   audio payload format described in this document has some limitations
   related to the signaling of audio codec parameters for the required
   multiplexing format.  Therefore, for new system designs [RFC3640] is
   preferred, which does not have these restrictions.

   This document obsoletes RFC 3016.  A revision of RFC 3016 was
   required because of some misalignments between RFC 3016 and the 3GPP
   PSS specification regarding the RTP payload format for MPEG-4 Audio.
   Changes from RFC 3016 are summarized in Section 11.  Issues on
   backward compatibility to RFC 3016 are discussed in Section 1.3.

The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-payload-rfc3016bis/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-payload-rfc3016bis/

No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.