1 Extend FEC BB to RTP streaming? Michael Luby Digital Fountain.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RTP Payload Format for Reed Solomon FEC of Multiple Flows
Advertisements

Draft-roux-fecframe-repacketization-00..txt, CEA LIST, 77th IETF Meeting, March 23d Benefits of re-packetization for FEC based protection of multimedia.
RTP Payload Format for Multiple Flows FEC draft-peck-fecframe-rtp-mf-01 Orly Peck, RADVISION IETF 77 – March 2010.
RTP Payload Format for Reed-Solomon FEC draft-galanos-fecframe-rtp-reedsolomon-00 Sarit Galanos, RADVISION IETF 76 – November 2009.
RTP Payload Format for Multiple Flows FEC draft-peck-fecframe-rtp-mf-00 Orly Peck, RADVISION IETF 76 – November 2009.
CPSC 441 Tutorial TA: Fang Wang Some of the slide contents are courtesy of the authors of the the following textbooks: - “Mastering Computer Networks:
Zero byte ROHC RTP1Lars-Erik Jonsson, Zero-byte ROHC RTP Background, requirements, current status and proposed way forward Lars-Erik Jonsson.
Fountain Codes Amin Shokrollahi EPFL and Digital Fountain, Inc.
8/2/ IETF, Pittsburgh Kutscher/Ott/Bormann SDPng Requirements draft-kutscher-mmusic-sdpng-req-00.txt Dirk Jörg
1 PSAMP Protocol Specifications IPFIX IETF-64 November 10th, 2005 Benoit Claise Juergen Quittek Andrew Johnson.
MPEG-4 RTP transport Philippe Gentric Philips Digital Networks 49th IETF Conference San Diego, 14 December 2000.
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS). 2 MPLS Overview A forwarding scheme designed to speed up IP packet forwarding (RFC 3031) Idea: use a fixed length.
1 Lot 3 - Développements MNGT to FAC-CM Interface Version 5 Baris DEMIRAY / Michelle WETTERWALD
INRIA Rhône-Alpes - Planète research group Reed-Solomon FEC I-D LDPC-* FEC I-D TESLA I-D Simple-auth I-D IETF 70 th – Vancouver meeting, November 2007.
MPEG-4 Design Team Report. 2 Proposals draft-ietf-avt-rtp-mpeg4-02.txt draft-guillemot-genrtp-01.txt draft-jnb-mpeg4av-rtp-00.txt FlexMux packetization.
Audio/Video Transport Working Group 44th IETF, Minneapolis March 1999 Stephen Casner -- Cisco Systems Colin Perkins -- UCL Mailing list:
Simple LDPC-Staircase FEC Scheme for FECFRAME draft-roca-fecframe-ldpc-01 IETF 79 – Beijing, November 2010 V. Roca – M. Cunche (INRIA) J. Lacan (ISAE)
SIPREC Conference Recording (draft-kyzivat-siprec-conference-use-cases-01) IETF 89, March 7, 2014 Authors: Michael Yan, Paul Kyzivat, Simon Romano.
PDU Handling in IEEE m IEEE Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9) Document Number: IEEE C802.16m-08/924 Date Submitted: Source:
1 Ethernet & IEEE Cisco Section 7.3 Stephanie Hutter October 2000.
1 Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
1 RTP Multiplexing using Tunnels (TCRTP) Bruce Thompson Tmima Koren Cisco Systems Inc.
CDB Chris Bonatti (IECA, Inc.) Tel: (+1) Proposed PKI4IPSEC Certificate Management Requirements Document IETF #59 – PKI4IPSEC Working.
Real-time Flow Management 2 BOF: Remote Packet Capture Extensions Jürgen Quittek NEC Europe Ltd, Heidelberg, Germany Georg Carle GMD.
IPsec Introduction 18.2 Security associations 18.3 Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol (ISAKMP) 18.4 Internet Key Exchange.
80-VXXX-X A July 2008 Page 1 QUALCOMM Confidential and Proprietary PMIP Comparison QUALCOMM Inc. Jun Wang, George Cherian, Masa Shirota
1 RaptorG Forward Error Correction Scheme for Object Delivery draft-luby-rmt-bb-fec-raptorg-object-00 (update to this to be officially submitted soon)
GTP (Generic Tunneling Protocol) Alessio Casati/Lucent Technologies Charles E. Perkins/Nokia Research IETF 47 draft-casati-gtp-00.txt.
1 Raptor codes for reliable multicast object delivery Michael Luby Digital Fountain.
INRIA Rhône-Alpes - V. Roca - 1 FCAST: Scalable Object Delivery on top of the ALC Protocol IETF 68 th – Prague meeting, March 2007 Vincent Roca (INRIA)
Considerations for Civic Addresses in PIDF-LO draft-wolf-civicaddresses-austria-01 IETF 71, Mar 2008, Philadelphia, PA, USA Karl Heinz Wolf Alexander Mayrhofer.
1 Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
IETF#64 – 7-11 November 2005 fecframe BOF Chair:Mark Watson Mailing List:
RTP Payload Format for Reed-Solomon FEC draft-galanos-fecframe-rtp-reedsolomon-01 Sarit Galanos, RADVISION IETF 77 – March 2010 Orly.
WSON Optical Interface Class draft-martinelli-wson-interface-class-02 Giovanni MartinelliCisco Gabriele GalimbertiCisco Lyndon OngCiena Daniele CeccarelliEricsson.
Supercharged Forward Error Correction Codes draft-stauffer-rmt-bb-fec-supercharged-00 (update to this soon to be submitted officially) IETF #84 – Vancouver.
Authentication Header ● RFC 2402 ● Services – Connectionless integrity – Data origin authentication – Replay protection – As much header authentication.
Simple Reed-Solomon FEC Scheme for FECFRAME draft-roca-fecframe-simple-rs-01 IETF 79 – Beijing, November 2010 V. Roca – M. Cunche (INRIA) J. Lacan – A.
QoS Model for Networks Using 3GPP QoS Classes (draft-jeong-nsis-3gpp-qosm-00) Seong-Ho Jeong, Sung-Hyuck Lee, Jongho Bang, Byoung-Jun Lee IETF NSIS Interim.
Slide title :32-35pt Color: R153 G0 B0 Corporate Font : FrutigerNext LT Medium Font to be used by customers and partners : Arial Slide text :20-22pt Bullets.
1-D Interleaved Parity FEC draft-begen-fecframe-interleaved-fec-scheme-00 IETF 72 – July 2008 Ali C. Begen
SIPREC Conference Recording (draft-kyzivat-siprec-conference-use-cases-00) IETF 87, November 4, 2013 Authors: Michael Yan, Paul Kyzivat, Simon Romano.
GOE FEC schemes GOE FEC schemes IETF83, March 26 th, 2012, Paris V. Roca, A. Roumy (Inria) B. Sayadi (ALU-BL)
8 Byte BGP Communities Finding a practical way forward.
Universal Object Delivery (UOD) & Generalized Object Encoding (GOE) IETF 83 MARCH 25 – 30, 2012 Paris, France Kevin Fall, Mike Luby & Thomas Stockhammer.
NACK-Oriented Reliable Multicast (NORM) Update
Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
Digital readout architecture for Velopix
IETF 82 BFCPBIS WG Meeting
IETF#67 – 5-10 November 2006 FECFRAME requirements (draft-ietf-fecframe-req-01) Mark Watson.
M. Luby, Digital Fountain
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
Transport Layer.
IEEE TG13 Ad-hoc Berlin Fraunhofer OOK implementation
UOD RAPTORQ FEC SCHEME draft-luby-uod-raptoq-00 IETF PRAGUE MARCH 27 – APRIL 1, 2011 Mike Luby & Thomas Stockhammer.
Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
IP - The Internet Protocol
Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
Transport Protocols An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
IP - The Internet Protocol
IETF 100 draft-zheng-xrblock-effective-loss-index-02
Packet flow for capturing data
2/4/2019May 2008 November 2007 doc.: IEEE /2752r1
IP - The Internet Protocol
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS). 2 MPLS Overview A forwarding scheme designed to speed up IP packet forwarding (RFC 3031) Idea: use a fixed length.
Submission Title: Fraunhofer OOK implementation
Fix the Issue on Number Of HE-SIG-B Symbols
IP - The Internet Protocol
Transport Protocols Relates to Lab 5. An overview of the transport protocols of the TCP/IP protocol suite. Also, a short discussion of UDP.
Presentation transcript:

1 Extend FEC BB to RTP streaming? Michael Luby Digital Fountain

2 Motivation  A lot of careful thought and experience has gone into the FEC BB  It is a modular, reusable building block that has successfully been the basis of File delivery apps (FLUTE, commercial) Streaming apps (proprietary, commercial)  Based on this experience, there is a proposal to improve the FEC BB in its move from Experimental to Proposed Standard status  This is a good time to officially allow FEC BB to apply to streaming

3 Motivation  3GPP SA4 MBMS service has adopted an FEC protection architecture for RTP streaming data that fits into the FEC BB  Generic approach to using FEC for streaming has been identified and verified to be applicable to the 5/6 FEC schemes under consideration for MBMS S4-AHP159, S4-AHP138, S4-AHP166, S4-AHP181  Most likely will end up being part of MBMS in Release 6  3GPP intention is to bring this work back to IETF (at least in form of Informational RFC)

4 FEC streaming source block formation example 08B 0,0 B 0,1 B 0,2 B 0,4 B 0,3 B 0,5 B 0,6 B Source symbol 0 Source symbol 1 Source symbol 2 Source symbol 5 Source symbol 3 Source symbol B 1,0 B 1,1 B 1,2 B 1,4 B 1,3 B 1,5 B 1,6 B 1,7 B 1,8 00 B 1,9 B 1,10 B 1,11 B 1,12 B 1,13 B 1,14 B 1,15 B 1,16 B 1,17 B 1,18 B 1,19 B 1,20 B 1,21 B 1,22 B 1,23 Symbol size = 7 bytes First RTP packet = 8 bytes Second RTP packet = 24 bytes Source block = length of RTP packet, RTP packet (padded out to full symbol) Source block

5 Source Packet FEC Payload ID SBNESI  SBN (Source Block Number) Numbered consecutively Identifies the source block that the source RTP packets is part of  ESI (Encoding Symbol ID) Index of first source symbol in source block where this RTP packet starts Interpretation is FEC scheme independent (except for possibly the length of the field)

6 Repair packet FEC Payload ID  FEC Scheme dependent  SBN Identifies the source block from which the repair symbols are generated Used by all FEC Schemes  ESI Identifies how the repair symbols are generated This is FEC scheme dependent Used by all FEC Schemes  SBL Number of source symbols in the source block For some FEC Schemes, this may be part of OTI  EBL Maximum number of encoding symbols generated for the source block Used by some FEC Schemes For some FEC Schemes, this may be part of the OTI  T Symbol length For many FEC schemes, this may be part of the OTI

7 Objective  Proper split of work between AVT and RMT Streaming issues to be addressed in AVT –How signaling of OTI is done –How source blocks are formed –How source packets and repair packets are multiplexed and demultiplexed FEC issues to be addressed in RMT –FEC Schemes defined –FEC Payload ID(s) to be used –FEC OTI parameters defined

8 Possibilities for FEC BB  Explicitly allow applicability to streaming Currently limited to object delivery by RMT charter  Some FEC Encoding IDs may not be applicable to streaming (leave as is)  Some FEC Encoding IDs may be applicable to streaming without modification (allow mention of this)  Some FEC Encoding IDS may be applicable to both with minor modifications (e.g., use a subset of OTI parameters for streaming) Use different FEC Encoding IDs for objects and streaming? Use one FEC Encoding ID and explicit indication in OTI of whether streaming or object delivery? Use one FEC Encoding ID and implicit indication based on what is included in OTI? Define FEC Encoding ID for only repair packets and let AVT define generic format for source FEC packets?