GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc8817



Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) V. Demjanenko Request for Comments: 8817 J. Punaro Category: Standards Track D. Satterlee ISSN: 2070-1721 VOCAL Technologies, Ltd.

                                                           August 2020
     RTP Payload Format for Tactical Secure Voice Cryptographic
           Interoperability Specification (TSVCIS) Codec

Abstract

 This document describes the RTP payload format for the Tactical
 Secure Voice Cryptographic Interoperability Specification (TSVCIS)
 speech coder.  TSVCIS is a scalable narrowband voice coder supporting
 varying encoder data rates and fallbacks.  It is implemented as an
 augmentation to the Mixed Excitation Linear Prediction Enhanced
 (MELPe) speech coder by conveying additional speech coder parameters
 to enhance voice quality.  TSVCIS augmented speech data is processed
 in conjunction with its temporally matched Mixed Excitation Linear
 Prediction (MELP) 2400 speech data.  The RTP packetization of TSVCIS
 and MELPe speech coder data is described in detail.

Status of This Memo

 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
 Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8817.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2020 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 extracted from this document must
 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
 described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction
   1.1.  Conventions
   1.2.  Abbreviations
 2.  Background
 3.  Payload Format
   3.1.  MELPe Bitstream Definitions
     3.1.1.  2400 bps Bitstream Structure
     3.1.2.  1200 bps Bitstream Structure
     3.1.3.  600 bps Bitstream Structure
     3.1.4.  Comfort Noise Bitstream Definition
   3.2.  TSVCIS Bitstream Definition
   3.3.  Multiple TSVCIS Frames in an RTP Packet
   3.4.  Congestion Control Considerations
 4.  Payload Format Parameters
   4.1.  Media Type Definitions
   4.2.  Mapping to SDP
   4.3.  Declarative SDP Considerations
   4.4.  Offer/Answer SDP Considerations
 5.  Discontinuous Transmissions
 6.  Packet Loss Concealment
 7.  IANA Considerations
 8.  Security Considerations
 9.  References
   9.1.  Normative References
   9.2.  Informative References
 Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

 This document describes how compressed Tactical Secure Voice
 Cryptographic Interoperability Specification (TSVCIS) speech as
 produced by the TSVCIS codec [TSVCIS] [NRLVDR] may be formatted for
 use as an RTP payload.  The TSVCIS speech coder (or TSVCIS speech-
 aware communications equipment on any intervening transport link) may
 adjust to restricted bandwidth conditions by reducing the amount of
 augmented speech data and relying on the underlying MELPe speech
 coder for the most constrained bandwidth links.
 Details are provided for packetizing the TSVCIS augmented speech data
 along with MELPe 2400 bps speech parameters in an RTP packet.  The
 sender may send one or more codec data frames per packet, depending
 on the application scenario or based on transport network conditions,
 bandwidth restrictions, delay requirements, and packet loss
 tolerance.

1.1. Conventions

 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.
 Best current practices for writing an RTP payload format
 specification were followed [RFC2736] [RFC8088].

1.2. Abbreviations

 The following abbreviations are used in this document.
 AVP:      Audio/Video Profile
 AVPF:     Audio/Video Profile Feedback
 CELP:     Code-Excited Linear Prediction
 FEC:      Forward Error Correction
 LPC:      Linear-Predictive Coding
 LSB:      Least Significant Bit
 MELP:     Mixed Excitation Linear Prediction
 MELPe:    Mixed Excitation Linear Prediction Enhanced
 MSB:      Most Significant Bit
 MTC:      Modified Count
 NATO:     North American Treaty Organization
 NRL:      Naval Research Lab
 PLC:      Packet Loss Concealment
 SAVP:     Secure Audio/Video Profile
 SAVPF:    Secure Audio/Video Profile Feedback
 SDP:      Session Description Protocol
 SSRC:     Synchronization Source
 SRTP:     Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol
 TSVCIS:   Tactical Secure Voice Cryptographic Interoperability
           Specification
 VAD:      Voice Activity Detect
 VDR:      Variable Date Rate

2. Background

 The MELP speech coder was developed by the US military as an upgrade
 from the LPC-based CELP standard vocoder for low-bitrate
 communications [MELP].  ("LPC" stands for "Linear-Predictive Coding",
 and "CELP" stands for "Code-Excited Linear Prediction".)  MELP was
 further enhanced and subsequently adopted by NATO as "MELPe" for use
 by its members and Partnership for Peace countries for military and
 other governmental communications as international NATO Standard
 STANAG 4591 [MELPE].
 The Tactical Secure Voice Cryptographic Interoperability
 Specification (TSVCIS) is a specification written by the Tactical
 Secure Voice Working Group (TSVWG) to enable all modern tactical
 secure voice devices to be interoperable across the US Department of
 Defense [TSVCIS].  One of the most important aspects is that the
 voice modes defined in TSVCIS are based on specific fixed rates of
 the Naval Research Lab's (NRL's) Variable Date Rate (VDR) Vocoder,
 which uses the MELPe standard as its base [NRLVDR].  A complete
 TSVCIS speech frame consists of MELPe speech parameters and
 corresponding TSVCIS augmented speech data.
 In addition to the augmented speech data, the TSVCIS specification
 identifies which speech coder and framing bits are to be encrypted
 and how they are protected by forward error correction (FEC)
 techniques (using block codes).  At the RTP transport layer, only the
 speech coder-related bits need to be considered and are conveyed in
 unencrypted form.  In most IP-based network deployments, standard
 link encryption methods (Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol (SRTP),
 VPNs, FIPS 140 link encryptors, or Type 1 Ethernet encryptors) would
 be used to secure the RTP speech contents.
 TSVCIS augmented speech data is derived from the signal processing
 and data generated by the MELPe speech coder.  For the purposes of
 this specification, only the general parameter nature of TSVCIS will
 be characterized.  Depending on the bandwidth available (and FEC
 requirements), a varying number of TSVCIS-specific speech coder
 parameters need to be transported.  These are first byte-packed and
 then conveyed from encoder to decoder.
 Byte packing of TSVCIS speech data into packed parameters is
 processed as per the following example, where
 Three-bit field:  Bits A, B, and C (A is MSB; C is LSB)
 Five-bit field:  Bits D, E, F, G, and H (D is MSB; H is LSB)
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      |   H  |   G  |   F  |   E  |   D  |   C  |   B  |   A  |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
 This packing method places the three-bit field "first" in the lowest
 bits followed by the next five-bit field.  Parameters may be split
 between octets with the most significant bits in the earlier octet.
 Any unfilled bits in the last octet MUST be filled with zero.
 In order to accommodate a varying amount of TSVCIS augmented speech
 data, an octet count specifies the number of octets representing the
 TSVCIS packed parameters.  The encoding to do so is presented in
 Section 3.2.  TSVCIS specifically uses the NRL VDR in two
 configurations with a fixed set of 15 and 35 packed octet parameters
 in a standardized order [TSVCIS].

3. Payload Format

 The TSVCIS codec augments the standard MELP 2400, 1200, and 600
 bitrates and hence uses 22.5, 67.5, or 90 ms frames with a sampling
 rate clock of 8 kHz, so the RTP timestamp MUST be in units of 1/8000
 of a second.
 The RTP payload for TSVCIS has the format shown in Figure 1.  No
 additional header specific to this payload format is needed.  This
 format is intended for situations where the sender and the receiver
 send one or more codec data frames per packet.
  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                         RTP Header                            |
 +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
 |                                                               |
 +                 one or more frames of TSVCIS                  |
 |                                                               |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                    Figure 1: Packet Format Diagram
 The RTP header of the packetized encoded TSVCIS speech has the
 expected values as described in [RFC3550].  The usage of the M bit
 SHOULD be as specified in the applicable RTP profile -- for example,
 [RFC3551] specifies that if the sender does not suppress silence
 (i.e., sends a frame on every frame interval), the M bit will always
 be zero.  When more than one codec data frame is present in a single
 RTP packet, the timestamp specified is that of the oldest data frame
 represented in the RTP packet.
 The assignment of an RTP payload type for this new packet format is
 outside the scope of this document and will not be specified here.
 It is expected that the RTP profile for a particular class of
 applications will assign a payload type for this encoding; if that is
 not done, then a payload type in the dynamic range shall be chosen by
 the sender.

3.1. MELPe Bitstream Definitions

 The TSVCIS speech coder includes all three MELPe coder rates used as
 base speech parameters or as speech coders for bandwidth-restricted
 links.  RTP packetization of MELPe follows [RFC8130] and is repeated
 here for all three MELPe rates [RFC8130], with its recommendations
 now regarded as requirements.  The bits previously labeled as RSVA,
 RSVB, and RSVC in [RFC8130] SHOULD be filled with rate code bits
 CODA, CODB, and CODC, as shown in Table 1 (compatible with Table 7 in
 Section 3.3 of [RFC8130]).
            +===============+======+======+======+========+
            | Coder Bitrate | CODA | CODB | CODC | Length |
            +===============+======+======+======+========+
            | 2400 bps      | 0    | 0    | N/A  | 7      |
            +---------------+------+------+------+--------+
            | 1200 bps      | 1    | 0    | 0    | 11     |
            +---------------+------+------+------+--------+
            | 600 bps       | 0    | 1    | N/A  | 7      |
            +---------------+------+------+------+--------+
            | Comfort Noise | 1    | 0    | 1    | 2      |
            +---------------+------+------+------+--------+
            | TSVCIS Data   | 1    | 1    | N/A  | var.   |
            +---------------+------+------+------+--------+
                  Table 1: TSVCIS/MELPe Frame Bitrate
                      Indicators and Frame Length
 The total number of bits used to describe one MELPe frame of 2400 bps
 speech is 54, which fits in 7 octets (with two rate code bits).  For
 MELPe 1200 bps speech, the total number of bits used is 81, which
 fits in 11 octets (with three rate code bits and four unused bits).
 For MELPe 600 bps speech, the total number of bits used is 54, which
 fits in 7 octets (with two rate code bits).  The comfort noise frame
 consists of 13 bits, which fits in 2 octets (with three rate code
 bits).  TSVCIS packed parameters will use the last code combination
 in a trailing byte as discussed in Section 3.2.
 It should be noted that CODB for MELPe 600 bps mode MAY deviate from
 the value in Table 1 when bit 55 is used as an alternating 1/0 end-
 to-end framing bit.  Frame decoding would remain distinct as CODA
 being zero on its own would indicate a 7-byte frame for either a 2400
 or 600 bps rate, and the use of 600 bps speech coding could be
 deduced from the RTP timestamp (and anticipated by the Session
 Description Protocol (SDP) negotiations).

3.1.1. 2400 bps Bitstream Structure

 The 2400 bps MELPe RTP payload is constructed as per Figure 2.  Note
 that CODA MUST be filled with 0 and CODB SHOULD be filled with 0 as
 per Section 3.1.  CODB MAY contain an end-to-end framing bit if
 required by the endpoints.
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_08 | B_07 | B_06 | B_05 | B_04 | B_03 | B_02 | B_01 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_16 | B_15 | B_14 | B_13 | B_12 | B_11 | B_10 | B_09 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_24 | B_23 | B_22 | B_21 | B_20 | B_19 | B_18 | B_17 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_32 | B_31 | B_30 | B_29 | B_28 | B_27 | B_26 | B_25 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_40 | B_39 | B_38 | B_37 | B_36 | B_35 | B_34 | B_33 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_48 | B_47 | B_46 | B_45 | B_44 | B_43 | B_42 | B_41 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | CODA | CODB | B_54 | B_53 | B_52 | B_51 | B_50 | B_49 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
             Figure 2: Packed MELPe 2400 bps Payload Octets

3.1.2. 1200 bps Bitstream Structure

 The 1200 bps MELPe RTP payload is constructed as per Figure 3.  Note
 that CODA, CODB, and CODC MUST be filled with 1, 0, and 0,
 respectively, as per Section 3.1.  RSV0 MUST be coded as 0.
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_08 | B_07 | B_06 | B_05 | B_04 | B_03 | B_02 | B_01 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_16 | B_15 | B_14 | B_13 | B_12 | B_11 | B_10 | B_09 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_24 | B_23 | B_22 | B_21 | B_20 | B_19 | B_18 | B_17 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_32 | B_31 | B_30 | B_29 | B_28 | B_27 | B_26 | B_25 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_40 | B_39 | B_38 | B_37 | B_36 | B_35 | B_34 | B_33 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_48 | B_47 | B_46 | B_45 | B_44 | B_43 | B_42 | B_41 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_56 | B_55 | B_54 | B_53 | B_52 | B_51 | B_50 | B_49 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_64 | B_63 | B_62 | B_61 | B_60 | B_59 | B_58 | B_57 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_72 | B_71 | B_70 | B_69 | B_68 | B_67 | B_66 | B_65 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_80 | B_79 | B_78 | B_77 | B_76 | B_75 | B_74 | B_73 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | CODA | CODB | CODC | RSV0 | RSV0 | RSV0 | RSV0 | B_81 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
             Figure 3: Packed MELPe 1200 bps Payload Octets

3.1.3. 600 bps Bitstream Structure

 The 600 bps MELPe RTP payload is constructed as per Figure 4.  Note
 CODA MUST be filled with 0 and CODB SHOULD be filled with 1 as per
 Section 3.1.  CODB MAY contain an end-to-end framing bit if required
 by the endpoints.
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_08 | B_07 | B_06 | B_05 | B_04 | B_03 | B_02 | B_01 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_16 | B_15 | B_14 | B_13 | B_12 | B_11 | B_10 | B_09 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_24 | B_23 | B_22 | B_21 | B_20 | B_19 | B_18 | B_17 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_32 | B_31 | B_30 | B_29 | B_28 | B_27 | B_26 | B_25 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_40 | B_39 | B_38 | B_37 | B_36 | B_35 | B_34 | B_33 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_48 | B_47 | B_46 | B_45 | B_44 | B_43 | B_42 | B_41 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | CODA | CODB | B_54 | B_53 | B_52 | B_51 | B_50 | B_49 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
             Figure 4: Packed MELPe 600 bps Payload Octets

3.1.4. Comfort Noise Bitstream Definition

 The comfort noise MELPe RTP payload is constructed as per Figure 5.
 Note that CODA, CODB, and CODC MUST be filled with 1, 0, and 1,
 respectively, as per Section 3.1.
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | B_08 | B_07 | B_06 | B_05 | B_04 | B_03 | B_02 | B_01 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      | CODA | CODB | CODC | B_13 | B_12 | B_11 | B_10 | B_09 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
          Figure 5: Packed MELPe Comfort Noise Payload Octets

3.2. TSVCIS Bitstream Definition

 The TSVCIS augmented speech data as packed parameters MUST be placed
 immediately after a corresponding MELPe 2400 bps payload in the same
 RTP packet.  The packed parameters are counted in octets (TC).  The
 preferred placement SHOULD be used for TSVCIS payloads with TC less
 than or equal to 77 octets; this is shown in Figure 6.  In the
 preferred placement, a single trailing octet SHALL be appended to
 include a two-bit rate code, CODA and CODB (both bits set to one),
 and a six-bit modified count (MTC).  The special modified count value
 of all ones (representing an MTC value of 63) SHALL NOT be used for
 this format as it is used as the indicator for the alternate packing
 format shown next.  In a standard implementation, the TSVCIS speech
 coder uses a minimum of 15 octets for parameters in octet packed
 form.  The modified count (MTC) MUST be reduced by 15 from the full
 octet count (TC).  Computed MTC = TC-15.  This accommodates a maximum
 of 77 parameter octets (the maximum value of MTC is 62; 77 is the sum
 of 62+15).
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   1  | T008 | T007 | T006 | T005 | T004 | T003 | T002 | T001 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   2  | T016 | T015 | T014 | T013 | T012 | T011 | T010 | T009 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   3  | T024 | T023 | T022 | T021 | T020 | T019 | T018 | T017 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   4  | T032 | T031 | T030 | T029 | T028 | T027 | T026 | T025 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   5  | T040 | T039 | T038 | T037 | T036 | T035 | T034 | T033 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   6  | T048 | T047 | T046 | T045 | T044 | T043 | T042 | T041 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   7  | TO56 | TO55 | T054 | T053 | T052 | T051 | T050 | T049 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   8  | T064 | T063 | T062 | T061 | T060 | T059 | T058 | T057 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   9  | T072 | T071 | T070 | T069 | T068 | T067 | T066 | T065 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  10  | T080 | T079 | T078 | T077 | T076 | T075 | T074 | T073 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  11  | T088 | T087 | T086 | T085 | T084 | T083 | T082 | T081 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  12  | TO96 | TO95 | T094 | T093 | T092 | T091 | T090 | T089 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  13  | T104 | T103 | T102 | T101 | T100 | T099 | T098 | T097 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  14  | T112 | T111 | T110 | T109 | T108 | T107 | T106 | T105 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  15  | T120 | T119 | T118 | T117 | T116 | T115 | T114 | T113 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      |                      .  .  .  .                       |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
 TC+1 | CODA | CODB |          modified octet count           |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
            Figure 6: Preferred Packed TSVCIS Payload Octets
 In order to accommodate all other NRL VDR configurations, an
 alternate parameter placement MUST use two trailing bytes as shown in
 Figure 7.  The last trailing byte MUST be filled with a two-bit rate
 code, CODA and CODB (both bits set to one), and its six-bit count
 field MUST be filled with ones.  The second to last trailing byte
 MUST contain the parameter count (TC) in octets (a value from 1 and
 255, inclusive).  The value of zero SHALL be considered as reserved.
         MSB                                              LSB
          0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   1  | T008 | T007 | T006 | T005 | T004 | T003 | T002 | T001 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
   2  | T016 | T015 | T014 | T013 | T012 | T011 | T010 | T009 |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
      |                      .  .  .  .                       |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
 TC+1 |                      octet count                      |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
 TC+2 | CODA | CODB |   1  |   1  |   1  |   1  |   1  |   1  |
      +------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
       Figure 7: Length Unrestricted Packed TSVCIS Payload Octets

3.3. Multiple TSVCIS Frames in an RTP Packet

 A TSVCIS RTP packet payload consists of zero or more consecutive
 TSVCIS coder frames (each consisting of MELPe 2400 and TSVCIS coder
 data), with the oldest frame first, followed by zero or one MELPe
 comfort noise frame.  The presence of a comfort noise frame can be
 determined by its rate code bits in its last octet.
 The default packetization interval is one coder frame (22.5, 67.5, or
 90 ms) according to the coder bitrate (2400, 1200, or 600 bps).  For
 some applications, a longer packetization interval is used to reduce
 the packet rate.
 A TSVCIS RTP packet without coder and comfort noise frames MAY be
 used periodically by an endpoint to indicate connectivity by an
 otherwise idle receiver.
 TSVCIS coder frames in a single RTP packet MAY have varying TSVCIS
 parameter octet counts.  Its packed parameter octet count (length) is
 indicated in the trailing byte(s).  All MELPe frames in a single RTP
 packet MUST be of the same coder bitrate.  For all MELPe coder
 frames, the coder rate bits in the trailing byte identify the
 contents and length as per Table 1.
 It is important to observe that senders have the following additional
 restrictions:
  • Senders SHOULD NOT include more TSVCIS or MELPe frames in a single

RTP packet than will fit in the MTU of the RTP transport protocol.

  • Frames MUST NOT be split between RTP packets.
 It is RECOMMENDED that the number of frames contained within an RTP
 packet be consistent with the application.  For example, in telephony
 and other real-time applications where delay is important, the fewer
 frames per packet, the lower the delay.  However, for bandwidth-
 constrained links or delay-insensitive streaming messaging
 applications, more than one frame per packet or many frames per
 packet would be acceptable.
 Information describing the number of frames contained in an RTP
 packet is not transmitted as part of the RTP payload.  The way to
 determine the number of TSVCIS/MELPe frames is to identify each frame
 type and length, thereby counting the total number of octets within
 the RTP packet.

3.4. Congestion Control Considerations

 The target bitrate of TSVCIS can be adjusted at any point in time,
 thus allowing congestion management.  Furthermore, the amount of
 encoded speech or audio data encoded in a single packet can be used
 for congestion control, since the packet rate is inversely
 proportional to the packet duration.  A lower packet transmission
 rate reduces the amount of header overhead but at the same time
 increases latency and loss sensitivity, so it ought to be used with
 care.
 Since UDP does not provide congestion control, applications that use
 RTP over UDP SHOULD implement their own congestion control above the
 UDP layer [RFC8085] and MAY also implement a transport circuit
 breaker [RFC8083].  Work in the RMCAT Working Group [RMCAT] describes
 the interactions and conceptual interfaces necessary between the
 application components that relate to congestion control, including
 the RTP layer, the higher-level media codec control layer, and the
 lower-level transport interface, as well as components dedicated to
 congestion control functions.

4. Payload Format Parameters

 This RTP payload format is identified using the TSVCIS media subtype,
 which is registered in accordance with [RFC4855] and per the media
 type registration template from [RFC6838].

4.1. Media Type Definitions

 Type name:  audio
 Subtype name:  TSVCIS
 Required parameters:  Clock Rate (Hz): 8000
 Optional parameters:
    ptime:
       the recommended length of time (in milliseconds) represented by
       the media in a packet.  It SHALL use the nearest rounded-up ms
       integer packet duration.  For TSVCIS, this corresponds to the
       following values: 23, 45, 68, 90, 112, 135, 156, and 180.
       Larger values can be used as long as they are properly rounded.
       See Section 6 of [RFC4566].
    maxptime:
       the maximum length of time (in milliseconds) that can be
       encapsulated in a packet.  It SHALL use the nearest rounded-up
       ms integer packet duration.  For TSVCIS, this corresponds to
       the following values: 23, 45, 68, 90, 112, 135, 156, and 180.
       Larger values can be used as long as they are properly rounded.
       See Section 6 of [RFC4566].
    bitrate:
       specifies the MELPe coder bitrates supported.  Possible values
       are a comma-separated list of rates from the following set:
       2400, 1200, 600.  The modes are listed in order of preference;
       the first is preferred.  If "bitrate" is not present, the fixed
       coder bitrate of 2400 MUST be used.
    tcmax:
       specifies the TSVCIS maximum value for the TC supported or
       desired, ranging from 1 to 255.  If "tcmax" is not present, a
       default value of 35 is used.
    Channels:
       1
 Encoding considerations:  This media subtype is framed and binary;
    see Section 4.8 of [RFC6838].
 Security considerations:  Please see Section 8 of RFC 8817.
 Interoperability considerations:  N/A
 Published specification:  [TSVCIS]
 Applications that use this media type:  N/A
 Fragment identifier considerations:  N/A
 Additional information:
    Deprecated alias names for this type:  N/A
    Magic number(s):  N/A
    File extension(s):  N/A
    Macintosh file type code(s):  N/A
 Person & email address to contact for further information:
    Victor Demjanenko, Ph.D.  <victor.demjanenko@vocal.com>
 Intended usage:  COMMON
 Restrictions on usage:  The media subtype depends on RTP framing and
    hence is only defined for transfer via RTP [RFC3550].  Transport
    within other framing protocols is not defined at this time.
 Author:  Victor Demjanenko, Ph.D.
 Change controller:  IETF; contact <avt@ietf.org>
 Provisional registration? (standards tree only):  No

4.2. Mapping to SDP

 The mapping of the above-defined payload format media subtype and its
 parameters SHALL be done according to Section 3 of [RFC4855].
 The information carried in the media type specification has a
 specific mapping to fields in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)
 [RFC4566], which is commonly used to describe RTP sessions.  When SDP
 is used to specify sessions employing the TSVCIS codec, the mapping
 is as follows:
  • The media type ("audio") goes in SDP "m=" as the media name.
  • The media subtype (payload format name) goes in SDP "a=rtpmap" as

the encoding name.

  • The parameter "bitrate" goes in the SDP "a=fmtp" attribute by

copying it as a "bitrate=<value>" string.

  • The parameter "tcmax" goes in the SDP "a=fmtp" attribute by

copying it as a "tcmax=<value>" string.

  • The parameters "ptime" and "maxptime" go in the SDP "a=ptime" and

"a=maxptime" attributes, respectively.

 When conveying information via SDP, the encoding name SHALL be
 "TSVCIS" (the same as the media subtype).
 An example of the media representation in SDP for describing TSVCIS
 might be:
    m=audio 49120 RTP/AVP 96
    a=rtpmap:96 TSVCIS/8000
 The optional media type parameter "bitrate", when present, MUST be
 included in the "a=fmtp" attribute in the SDP, expressed as a media
 type string in the form of a semicolon-separated list of
 parameter=value pairs.  The string "value" can be one or more of
 2400, 1200, and 600, separated by commas (where each bitrate value
 indicates the corresponding MELPe coder).  An example of the media
 representation in SDP for describing TSVCIS when all three coder
 bitrates are supported might be:
    m=audio 49120 RTP/AVP 96
    a=rtpmap:96 TSVCIS/8000
    a=fmtp:96 bitrate=2400,600,1200
 The optional media type parameter "tcmax", when present, MUST be
 included in the "a=fmtp" attribute in the SDP, expressed as a media
 type string in the form of a semicolon-separated list of
 parameter=value pairs.  The string "value" is an integer number in
 the range of 1 to 255 representing the maximum number of TSVCIS
 parameter octets supported.  An example of the media representation
 in SDP for describing TSVCIS with a maximum of 101 octets supported
 is as follows:
    m=audio 49120 RTP/AVP 96
    a=rtpmap:96 TSVCIS/8000
    a=fmtp:96 tcmax=101
 The parameter "ptime" cannot be used for the purpose of specifying
 the TSVCIS operating mode due to the fact that, for certain values,
 it will be impossible to distinguish which mode is about to be used
 (e.g., when ptime=68, it would be impossible to distinguish whether
 the packet is carrying one frame of 67.5 ms or three frames of 22.5
 ms).
 Note that the payload format (encoding) names are commonly shown in
 upper case.  Media subtypes are commonly shown in lower case.  These
 names are case insensitive in both places.  Similarly, parameter
 names are case insensitive in both the media subtype name and the
 default mapping to the SDP a=fmtp attribute.

4.3. Declarative SDP Considerations

 For declarative media, the "bitrate" parameter specifies the possible
 bitrates used by the sender.  Multiple TSVCIS rtpmap values (such as
 97, 98, and 99, as used below) MAY be used to convey TSVCIS-coded
 voice at different bitrates.  The receiver can then select an
 appropriate TSVCIS codec by using 97, 98, or 99.
    m=audio 49120 RTP/AVP 97 98 99
    a=rtpmap:97 TSVCIS/8000
    a=fmtp:97 bitrate=2400
    a=rtpmap:98 TSVCIS/8000
    a=fmtp:98 bitrate=1200
    a=rtpmap:99 TSVCIS/8000
    a=fmtp:99 bitrate=600
 For declarative media, the "tcmax" parameter specifies the maximum
 number of octets of TSVCIS packed parameters used by the sender or
 the sender's communications channel.

4.4. Offer/Answer SDP Considerations

 In the Offer/Answer model [RFC3264], "bitrate" is a bidirectional
 parameter.  Both sides MUST use a common "bitrate" value or values.
 The offer contains the bitrates supported by the offerer, listed in
 its preferred order.  The answerer MAY agree to any bitrate by
 listing the bitrate first in the answerer response.  Additionally,
 the answerer MAY indicate any secondary bitrate or bitrates that it
 supports.  The initial bitrate used by both parties SHALL be the
 first bitrate specified in the answerer response.
 For example, if offerer bitrates are "2400,600" and answerer bitrates
 are "600,2400", the initial bitrate is 600.  If other bitrates are
 provided by the answerer, any common bitrate between the offer and
 answer MAY be used at any time in the future.  Activation of these
 other common bitrates is beyond the scope of this document.
 The use of a lower bitrate is often important for a case such as when
 one endpoint utilizes a bandwidth-constrained link (e.g., 1200 bps
 radio link or slower), where only the lower coder bitrate will work.
 In the Offer/Answer model [RFC3264], "tcmax" is a bidirectional
 parameter.  Both sides SHOULD use a common "tcmax" value.  The offer
 contains the tcmax supported by the offerer.  The answerer MAY agree
 to any tcmax equal to or less than this value by stating the desired
 tcmax in the answerer response.  The answerer alternatively MAY
 identify its own tcmax and rely on TSVCIS ignoring any augmented data
 it cannot use.

5. Discontinuous Transmissions

 A primary application of TSVCIS is for radio communications of voice
 conversations, and discontinuous transmissions are normal.  When
 TSVCIS is used in an IP network, TSVCIS RTP packet transmissions may
 cease and resume frequently.  RTP synchronization source (SSRC)
 sequence number gaps indicate lost packets to be filled by Packet
 Loss Concealment (PLC), while abrupt loss of RTP packets indicates
 intended discontinuous transmissions.  Resumption of voice
 transmission SHOULD be indicated by the RTP marker bit (M) set to 1.
 If a TSVCIS coder so desires, it may send a MELPe comfort noise frame
 as per Appendix B of [SCIP210] prior to ceasing transmission.  A
 receiver may optionally use comfort noise during its silence periods.
 No SDP negotiations are required.

6. Packet Loss Concealment

 TSVCIS packet loss concealment (PLC) uses the special properties and
 coding for the pitch/voicing parameter of the MELPe 2400 bps coder.
 The PLC erasure indication utilizes any of the errored encodings of a
 non-voiced frame as identified in Table 1 of [MELPE].  For the sake
 of simplicity, it is preferred that a code value of 3 for the pitch/
 voicing parameter be used.  Hence, set bits P0 and P1 to one and bits
 P2, P3, P4, P5, and P6 to zero.
 When using PLC in 1200 bps or 600 bps mode, the MELPe 2400 bps
 decoder is called three or four times, respectively, to cover the
 loss of a low bitrate MELPe frame.

7. IANA Considerations

 IANA has registered TSVCIS as specified in Section 4.1.  The media
 type has been added to the IANA registry for "RTP Payload Format
 Media Types" (https://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters).

8. Security Considerations

 RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification
 are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP
 specification [RFC3550] and in any applicable RTP profile such as
 RTP/AVP [RFC3551], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], RTP/SAVP [RFC3711], or RTP/
 SAVPF [RFC5124].  However, as discussed in [RFC7202], it is not an
 RTP payload format's responsibility to discuss or mandate what
 solutions are used to meet such basic security goals as
 confidentiality, integrity, and source authenticity for RTP in
 general.  This responsibility lies with anyone using RTP in an
 application.  They can find guidance on available security mechanisms
 and important considerations in [RFC7201].  Applications SHOULD use
 one or more appropriate strong security mechanisms.  The rest of this
 section discusses the security-impacting properties of the payload
 format itself.
 This RTP payload format and the TSVCIS decoder, to the best of our
 knowledge, do not exhibit any significant non-uniformity in the
 receiver-side computational complexity for packet processing and thus
 are unlikely to pose a denial-of-service threat due to the receipt of
 pathological data.  Additionally, the RTP payload format does not
 contain any active content.
 Please see the security considerations discussed in [RFC6562]
 regarding Voice Activity Detect (VAD) and its effect on bitrates.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

 [MELP]     Department of Defense, "Analog-to-Digital Conversion of
            Voice by 2,400 Bit/Second Mixed Excitation Linear
            Prediction (MELP)", Department of Defense
            Telecommunications Standard MIL-STD-3005, December 1999.
 [MELPE]    North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), "The 600 Bit/S,
            1200 Bit/S and 2400 Bit/S NATO Interoperable Narrow Band
            Voice Coder", STANAG No. 4591, October 2008.
 [NRLVDR]   Heide, D., Cohen, A., Lee, Y., and T. Moran, "Universal
            Vocoder Using Variable Data Rate Vocoding",
            DOI 10.21236/ada588068, Naval Research Lab NRL/FR/5555--
            13-10, 239, June 2013,
            <https://doi.org/10.21236/ada588068>.
 [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/info/rfc2119>.
 [RFC2736]  Handley, M. and C. Perkins, "Guidelines for Writers of RTP
            Payload Format Specifications", BCP 36, RFC 2736,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC2736, December 1999,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2736>.
 [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/info/rfc3264>.
 [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/info/rfc3550>.
 [RFC3551]  Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
            Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC3551, July 2003,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3551>.
 [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/info/rfc3711>.
 [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
            Description Protocol", RFC 4566, DOI 10.17487/RFC4566,
            July 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4566>.
 [RFC4855]  Casner, S., "Media Type Registration of RTP Payload
            Formats", RFC 4855, DOI 10.17487/RFC4855, February 2007,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4855>.
 [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/info/rfc5124>.
 [RFC6562]  Perkins, C. and JM. Valin, "Guidelines for the Use of
            Variable Bit Rate Audio with Secure RTP", RFC 6562,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC6562, March 2012,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6562>.
 [RFC6838]  Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type
            Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13,
            RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.
 [RFC8083]  Perkins, C. and V. Singh, "Multimedia Congestion Control:
            Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions", RFC 8083,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8083, March 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8083>.
 [RFC8085]  Eggert, L., Fairhurst, G., and G. Shepherd, "UDP Usage
            Guidelines", BCP 145, RFC 8085, DOI 10.17487/RFC8085,
            March 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8085>.
 [RFC8088]  Westerlund, M., "How to Write an RTP Payload Format",
            RFC 8088, DOI 10.17487/RFC8088, May 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8088>.
 [RFC8130]  Demjanenko, V. and D. Satterlee, "RTP Payload Format for
            the Mixed Excitation Linear Prediction Enhanced (MELPe)
            Codec", RFC 8130, DOI 10.17487/RFC8130, March 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8130>.
 [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/info/rfc8174>.
 [SCIP210]  National Security Agency, "SCIP Signaling Plan", SCIP-210,
            January 2013.

9.2. Informative References

 [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/info/rfc4585>.
 [RFC7201]  Westerlund, M. and C. Perkins, "Options for Securing RTP
            Sessions", RFC 7201, DOI 10.17487/RFC7201, April 2014,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7201>.
 [RFC7202]  Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Securing the RTP
            Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media
            Security Solution", RFC 7202, DOI 10.17487/RFC7202, April
            2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7202>.
 [RMCAT]    IETF, "RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques (rmcat)
            Working Group",
            <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/rmcat/about/>.
 [TSVCIS]   National Security Agency, "Tactical Secure Voice
            Cryptographic Interoperability Specification (TSVCIS)
            Version 3.1", NSA 09-01A, March 2019.

Authors' Addresses

 Victor Demjanenko, Ph.D.
 VOCAL Technologies, Ltd.
 520 Lee Entrance, Suite 202
 Buffalo, NY 14228
 United States of America
 Phone: +1 716 688 4675
 Email: victor.demjanenko@vocal.com
 John Punaro
 VOCAL Technologies, Ltd.
 520 Lee Entrance, Suite 202
 Buffalo, NY 14228
 United States of America
 Phone: +1 716 688 4675
 Email: john.punaro@vocal.com
 David Satterlee
 VOCAL Technologies, Ltd.
 520 Lee Entrance, Suite 202
 Buffalo, NY 14228
 United States of America
 Phone: +1 716 688 4675
 Email: david.satterlee@vocal.com
/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc8817.txt · Last modified: 2020/08/18 00:04 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki