summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc7867.txt
blob: 9f79464e26a70c8c02a97502f0428c7ee500e4f5 (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          R. Huang
Request for Comments: 7867                                        Huawei
Category: Standards Track                                      July 2016
ISSN: 2070-1721


         RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block
          for Loss Concealment Metrics for Video Applications

Abstract

   This document defines a new RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended
   Report (XR) block that allows the reporting of loss concealment
   metrics for video applications of RTP.

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
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7867.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   (http://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.








Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 1]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................2
      1.1. RTCP and RTCP XR Reports ...................................3
      1.2. Performance Metrics Framework ..............................3
      1.3. Applicability ..............................................3
   2. Terminology .....................................................3
   3. Video Loss Concealment Methods ..................................3
   4. Video Loss Concealment Report Block .............................4
   5. SDP Signaling ...................................................8
      5.1. SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension .....................8
      5.2. Offer/Answer Usage .........................................9
   6. Security Considerations .........................................9
   7. IANA Considerations .............................................9
      7.1. New RTCP XR Block Type Value ...............................9
      7.2. New RTCP XR SDP Parameter ..................................9
      7.3. Contact Information for Registrations .....................10
   8. References .....................................................10
      8.1. Normative References ......................................10
      8.2. Informative References ....................................11
   Appendix A. Metrics Represented Using the Template from RFC 6390 ..12
   Acknowledgements ..................................................16
   Authors' Addresses ................................................16

1.  Introduction

   Multimedia applications often suffer from packet losses in IP
   networks.  In order to get a reasonable degree of quality when there
   is packet loss, it is necessary to have loss concealment mechanisms
   at the decoder.  Video loss concealment is a range of techniques to
   mask the effects of packet loss in video communications.

   In some applications, reporting the information of receivers applying
   video loss concealment could give monitors or senders useful
   information on the Quality of Experience (QoE) of the application.
   One example is no-reference video quality evaluation.  Video probes
   located upstream from the video endpoint or terminal may not see loss
   occurring between the probe and the endpoint, and also may not be
   fully aware of the specific loss concealment methods being
   dynamically applied by the video endpoint.  Evaluating error
   concealment is important in this circumstance to estimate the
   subjective impact of impairments.

   This document defines one new block type for video loss concealment
   to augment those defined in [RFC3611] and [RFC7294] for use in a
   range of RTP video applications.  The metrics defined in this
   document belong to the class of transport-related terminal metrics
   defined in [RFC6792].



Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 2]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


1.1.  RTCP and RTCP XR Reports

   The use of RTCP for reporting is defined in [RFC3550].  [RFC3611]
   defines an extensible structure for reporting using an RTCP Extended
   Report (XR).  This document defines a new Extended Report block that
   is used as defined in [RFC3550] and [RFC3611].

1.2.  Performance Metrics Framework

   The Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390] provides guidance on the
   definition and specification of performance metrics.  The RTP
   monitoring framework [RFC6792] provides guidelines for the reporting
   block format using RTCP XR.  The XR block type described in this
   document is in accordance with the guidelines in [RFC6390] and
   [RFC6792].

1.3.  Applicability

   These metrics are applicable to video applications the video
   component of audio/video applications using RTP and applying packet
   loss concealment mechanisms that are incorporated into the receiving
   endpoint to mitigate the impact of network impairments on QoE.  For
   example, in an IPTV system, set-top boxes could use this RTCP XR
   block to report loss and loss concealment metrics to an IPTV
   management system to enable the service provider to monitor the
   quality of the IPTV service being delivered to end users.

2.  Terminology

   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].

3.  Video Loss Concealment Methods

   Video loss concealment mechanisms can be classified into 4 types as
   follows:

   a) Frame freeze

      The impaired video frame is not displayed; instead, the previously
      displayed frame is frozen for the duration of the loss event.

   b) Interframe extrapolation

      If an area of the video frame is damaged by loss, the same area
      from the previous frame(s) can be used to estimate what the
      missing pixels would have been.  This can work well in a scene



Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 3]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


      with no motion but can be very noticeable if there is significant
      movement from one frame to another.  Simple decoders can simply
      reuse the pixels that were in the missing area, while more complex
      decoders can try to use several frames to do a more complex
      extrapolation.  Another example of a sophisticated form of
      interframe repair is to estimate the motion of the damaged region
      based on the motion of surrounding regions, and use that to select
      what part of the previous frame to use for repair.  Some important
      frames, such as Instantaneous Decoding Refresh (IDR) frames, may
      not depend on any other frames and may be involved in a scene
      change.  Using the interframe extrapolation method to conceal the
      loss of these frames may not obtain a satisfactory result.

   c) Interpolation

      A decoder uses the undamaged pixels in the video frame to estimate
      what the missing block of pixels should have.

   d) Error-resilient encoding

      The sender encodes the message in a redundant way so that the
      receiver can correct errors using the redundant information.
      There are usually two kinds of error-resilient encoding: One is
      that the redundant data useful for error resiliency performed at
      the decoder can be embedded into the compressed image/video
      bitstream.  The other is encoding at the bitstream level, e.g.,
      Forward Error Correction (FEC).

   Usually, methods b, c, and d are deployed together to provide
   comprehensive loss concealment in complex decoders, while method a is
   relatively independent and may be applied in some simple decoders.
   Moreover, the frame-freeze method repairs video based on frames,
   while the other methods repair video based on fine-grained elements,
   such as macroblocks or bitstreams; this will cause the measurement
   metrics of frame-freeze and the other methods to be slightly
   different.  Thus, In this document, we differentiate between frame-
   freeze and the other 3 loss concealment mechanisms.

4.  Video Loss Concealment Report Block

   This block reports the video loss concealment metrics to complement
   the audio metrics defined in [RFC7294].  The report block MUST be
   sent in conjunction with the information from the Measurement
   Information Block [RFC6776].  Instances of this metric block refer by
   synchronization source (SSRC) to the separate auxiliary Measurement
   Information Block [RFC6776].  The Video Loss Concealment Report Block
   relies on the measurement period in the Measurement Information Block
   indicating the span of the report.  If the measurement period is not



Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 4]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


   received in the same compound RTCP packet as this metric block, this
   metric block MUST be discarded at the receiving side.  The metrics in
   this report block are based on measurements that are typically made
   at the time that a video frame is decoded and rendered for playout.

   The Video Loss Concealment Report Block has the following format:

    0               1               2               3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    BT=34      | I | V |  RSV  |       Block Length            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         SSRC of Source                        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Impaired Duration                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Concealed Duration                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Mean Frame Freeze Duration (optional)        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    MIFP       |    MCFP       |     FFSC      |     Reserved  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 1: Format for the Video Loss Concealment Report Block

   Block Type (BT): 8 bits

      A Video Loss Concealment Report Block is identified by the
      constant 34.

   Interval Metric Flag (I): 2 bits

      This field indicates whether the reported metrics are interval,
      cumulative, or sampled metrics [RFC6792]:

         I=10: Interval Duration - the reported value applies to the
               most recent measurement interval duration between
               successive metrics reports.

         I=11: Cumulative Duration - the reported value applies to the
               accumulation period characteristic of cumulative
               measurements.

         I=01: Sampled Value - this value MUST NOT be used for this
               block type.

         I=00: Reserved.




Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 5]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


   Video Loss Concealment Method Type (V): 2 bits

      This field is used to identify the video loss concealment method
      type used at the receiver.  The value is defined as follows:

         V=10: Frame-freeze
         V=11: Other Loss Concealment Method
         V=01 and V=00: Reserved

      If frame-freeze and another loss concealment method are used
      together for the media stream, two report blocks (one with V=10
      for frame freeze and one with V=11 for the other loss concealment
      method) SHOULD be compounded together to report complete
      concealment information.

   RSV: 4 bits

      These bits are reserved for future use.  They MUST be set to zero
      by senders and ignored by receivers (see Section 4.2 of
      [RFC6709]).

   Block Length: 16 bits

      This field is in accordance with the definition in [RFC3611].  In
      this report block, it MUST be set to 5 when V=10 and set to 4 when
      V=11.  The block MUST be discarded if the block length is set to a
      different value.

   SSRC of Source: 32 bits

      As defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC3611].

   Impaired Duration: 32 bits

      The total duration, expressed in units of RTP timestamp from the
      sending side of the reporting block, of video impaired by
      transmission loss before applying any loss concealment methods.

      Two values are reserved: A value of 0xFFFFFFFE indicates out of
      range (that is, a measured value exceeding 0xFFFFFFFD), and a
      value of 0xFFFFFFFF indicates that the measurement is unavailable.

   Concealed Duration: 32 bits

      The total duration, expressed in units of RTP timestamp from the
      sending side of the reporting block, of concealed damaged video
      pictures on which the loss concealment method corresponding to the
      Video Loss Concealment Method Type is applied.



Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 6]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


      Two values are reserved: A value of 0xFFFFFFFE indicates out of
      range (that is, a measured value exceeding 0xFFFFFFFD), and a
      value of 0xFFFFFFFF indicates that the measurement is unavailable.

   Mean Frame-Freeze Duration: 32 bits

      Mean Frame-Freeze Duration is the mean duration, expressed in
      units of RTP timestamp from the sending side of the reporting
      block, of the frame-freeze events.  The value of Mean Frame-Freeze
      Duration is calculated by summing the total duration of all frame
      freeze events and dividing by the number of events.  This metric
      is optional.  It only exists when Video Loss Concealment Method
      Type=10.

   Mean Impaired Frame Proportion (MIFP): 8 bits

      Mean Impaired Frame Proportion is the mean proportion of each
      video frame impaired by loss before applying any loss concealment
      method during the interval, expressed as a fixed-point number with
      the binary point at the left edge of the field.  It is calculated
      by summing the impaired proportion of each video frame and
      dividing by the number of frames during this period.  The impaired
      proportion of each video frame is obtained by dividing the number
      of missing macroblocks from this video frame by the total
      macroblock number of the video frame, which is equivalent to
      multiplying the result of the division by 256, limiting the
      maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and taking the integer
      part.

      If a video frame is totally lost, a value of 0xFF SHOULD be used
      for the frame when calculating the MIFP.

   Mean Concealed Frame Proportion (MCFP): 8 bits

      Mean Concealed Frame Proportion is the mean proportion of each
      video frame to which loss concealment (depicted as "V" in the
      definition of "Video Loss Concealment Method Type") was applied
      during the interval, expressed as a fixed-point number with the
      binary point at the left edge of the field.  It is calculated by
      summing the concealed proportion of each video frame and dividing
      by the number of frames during this period.  The concealed
      proportion of each video frame is obtained by dividing the number
      of concealed macroblocks from this video frame by the total
      macroblock number of the video frame, which is equivalent to
      multiplying the result of the division by 256, limiting the
      maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and taking the integer
      part.




Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 7]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


      When calculating the MCFP, a value of 0xFF SHOULD be used for a
      lost frame that is totally concealed, and a value of 0 SHOULD be
      used for the frame if there are no concealed macroblocks in it.
      For Video Loss Concealment Method Type=10, each frame covered in
      the period of frame freeze is considered to be totally concealed;
      this means a value of 0xFF MUST be assigned.

   Fraction of Frames Subject to Concealment (FFSC): 8 bits

      Fraction of Frames Subject to Concealment is calculated by
      dividing the number of frames to which loss concealment (using
      Video Loss Concealment Method Type) was applied by the total
      number of frames and expressing this value as a fixed-point number
      with the binary point at the left edge of the field.  It is
      equivalent to multiplying the result of the division by 256,
      limiting the maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and taking
      the integer part.

      A value of 0 indicates that there were no concealed frames, and a
      value of 0xFF indicates that the frames in the entire measurement
      interval are all concealed.

   Reserved: 8 bits

      These bits are reserved for future use.  They MUST be set to zero
      by senders and ignored by receivers (see Section 4.2 of
      [RFC6709]).

5.  SDP Signaling

   [RFC3611] defines the use of the Session Description Protocol (SDP)
   for signaling the use of RTCP XR blocks.

5.1.  SDP rtcp-xr-attrib Attribute Extension

   This session augments the SDP attribute "rtcp-xr" defined in Section
   5.1 of [RFC3611] by providing an additional value of "xr-format" to
   signal the use of the report block defined in this document.  The
   ABNF [RFC5234] syntax is as follows.

   xr-format =/ xr-vlc-block

   xr-vlc-block = "vlc"








Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 8]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


5.2.  Offer/Answer Usage

   When SDP is used in an offer/answer context, the SDP Offer/Answer
   usage defined in Section 5.2 of [RFC3611] for the unilateral
   "rtcp-xr" attribute parameters applies.  For detailed usage of
   Offer/Answer for unilateral parameters, refer to Section 5.2 of
   [RFC3611].

6.  Security Considerations

   It is believed that this RTCP XR block introduces no new security
   considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611].  This block does
   not provide per-packet statistics, so the risk to confidentiality
   documented in paragraph 3 of Section 7 of [RFC3611] does not apply.

   An attacker is likely to put incorrect information in the Video Loss
   Concealment reports; this will affect the estimation of the
   performance of video loss concealment mechanisms and the QoE of
   users.  Implementers SHOULD consider the guidance in [RFC7202] for
   using appropriate security mechanisms, i.e., where security is a
   concern, the implementation SHOULD apply encryption and
   authentication to the report block.  For example, this can be
   achieved by using the AVPF profile together with the Secure RTP
   profile as defined in [RFC3711]; an appropriate combination of the
   two profiles (an "SAVPF") is specified in [RFC5124].  However, other
   mechanisms also exist (documented in [RFC7201]) and might be more
   suitable.

7.  IANA Considerations

   New block types for RTCP XR are subject to IANA registration.  For
   general guidelines on IANA considerations for RTCP XR, please refer
   to [RFC3611].

7.1.  New RTCP XR Block Type Value

   This document assigns the block type value 34 to Video Loss
   Concealment Metric Report Block in the IANA "RTP Control Protocol
   Extended Reports (RTCP XR) Block Type Registry".

7.2.  New RTCP XR SDP Parameter

   This document also registers a new parameter "video-loss-concealment"
   in the "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR) Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters Registry".






Huang                        Standards Track                    [Page 9]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


7.3.  Contact Information for Registrations

   The contact information for the registration is:

      RAI Area Directors <rai-ads@ietf.org>

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [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, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.

   [RFC3611]  Friedman, T., Ed., Caceres, R., Ed., and A. Clark, Ed.,
              "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR)",
              RFC 3611, DOI 10.17487/RFC3611, November 2003,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3611>.

   [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,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>.

   [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, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5124>.

   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D., Ed., and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for
              Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.

   [RFC6776]  Clark, A. and Q. Wu, "Measurement Identity and Information
              Reporting Using a Source Description (SDES) Item and an
              RTCP Extended Report (XR) Block", RFC 6776,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6776, October 2012,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6776>.






Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 10]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


   [RFC7294]  Clark, A., Zorn, G., Bi, C., and Q. Wu, "RTP Control
              Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Blocks for
              Concealment Metrics Reporting on Audio Applications",
              RFC 7294, DOI 10.17487/RFC7294, July 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7294>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6390]  Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Guidelines for Considering New
              Performance Metric Development", BCP 170, RFC 6390,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6390, October 2011,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6390>.

   [RFC6709]  Carpenter, B., Aboba, B., Ed., and S. Cheshire, "Design
              Considerations for Protocol Extensions", RFC 6709,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6709, September 2012,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6709>.

   [RFC6792]  Wu, Q., Ed., Hunt, G., and P. Arden, "Guidelines for Use
              of the RTP Monitoring Framework", RFC 6792,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6792, November 2012,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6792>.

   [RFC7201]  Westerlund, M. and C. Perkins, "Options for Securing RTP
              Sessions", RFC 7201, DOI 10.17487/RFC7201, April 2014,
              <http://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, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7202>.




















Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 11]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


Appendix A.  Metrics Represented Using the Template from RFC 6390

   a. Video Impaired Duration Metric

      *  Metric Name: Video Impaired Duration Metric

      *  Metric Description: The total duration of the video impaired by
         transmission loss before applying any loss concealment methods.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.

      *  Units of Measurement: This metric is expressed in units of RTP
         timestamp.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.

      *  Use and Applications: The metric is applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         applied to the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact of
         network impairments on QoE.

   b. Video Concealed Duration Metric

      *  Metric Name: Video Concealed Duration Metric

      *  Metric Description: The total duration of concealed damaged
         video pictures on which loss concealment method corresponding
         to Video Loss Concealment Method Type is applied.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.

      *  Units of Measurement: This metric is expressed in units of RTP
         timestamp.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.





Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 12]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


      *  Use and Applications: These metrics are applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         incorporated into the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact
         of network impairments on QoE.

   c. Mean Video Frame-Freeze Duration Metric

      *  Metric Name: Mean Video Frame-Freeze Duration Metric

      *  Metric Description: The mean duration of the frame-freeze
         events.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.  The metric is
         calculated by summing the total duration of all frame-freeze
         events and dividing by the number of events.

      *  Units of Measurement: This metric is expressed in units of RTP
         timestamp.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.

      *  Use and Applications: These metrics are applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         incorporated into the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact
         of network impairments on QoE.

   d. Mean Impaired Video Frame Proportion Metric

      *  Metric Name: Mean Impaired Video Frame Proportion Metric

      *  Metric Description: Mean proportion of each video frame
         impaired by loss before applying any loss concealment method
         during the interval.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.  It is calculated by
         summing the impaired proportion of each video frame and
         dividing by the number of frames during this period.  The
         impaired proportion of each video frame is obtained by dividing
         the number of missing macroblocks from this video frame by the



Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 13]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


         total macroblock number of the video frame, which is equivalent
         to multiplying the result of the division by 256, limiting the
         maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and taking the
         integer part.

      *  Units of Measurement: This metric is expressed as a fixed-point
         number with the binary point at the left edge of the field.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.

      *  Use and Applications: These metrics are applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         incorporated into the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact
         of network impairments on QoE.

   e. Mean Concealed Video Frame Proportion Metric

      *  Metric Name: Mean Concealed Video Frame Proportion Metric

      *  Metric Description: Mean proportion of each video frame to
         which loss concealment (using Video Loss Concealment Method
         Type) was applied during the interval.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.  It is calculated by
         summing the concealed proportion of each video frame and
         dividing by the number of frames during this period.  The
         concealed proportion of each video frame is obtained by
         dividing the number of concealed macroblocks from this video
         frame by the total macroblock number of the video frame, which
         is equivalent to multiplying the result of the division by 256,
         limiting the maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and
         taking the integer part.

      *  Units of Measurement: This metric is expressed as a fixed-point
         number with the binary point at the left edge of the field.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.





Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 14]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


      *  Use and Applications: These metrics are applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         incorporated into the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact
         of network impairments on QoE.

   f. Fraction of Video Frames Subject to Concealment Metric

      *  Metric Name: Fraction of Video Frames Subject to Concealment
         Metric

      *  Metric Description: Proportion of concealed video frames to
         which loss concealment (using the Video Loss Concealment Method
         Type) was applied compared to the total number of frames during
         the interval.

      *  Method of Measurement or Calculation: The metric is based on
         measurements that are typically made at the time that a video
         frame is decoded and rendered for playout.  This metric is
         calculated by dividing the number of frames to which loss
         concealment (using Video Loss Concealment Method Type) was
         applied by the total number of frames.  It is equivalent to
         multiplying the result of the division by 256, limiting the
         maximum value to 255 (to avoid overflow), and taking the
         integer part.

      *  Units of Measurement:  This metric is expressed as a fixed-
         point number with the binary point at the left edge of the
         field.

      *  Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: It is
         measured at the receiving end of the RTP stream.

      *  Measurement Timing: See paragraph 1 of Section 4.

      *  Use and Applications: These metrics are applicable to video
         applications of RTP and the video component of audio/video
         applications in which packet loss concealment mechanisms are
         incorporated into the receiving endpoint to mitigate the impact
         of network impairments on QoE.











Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 15]
^L
RFC 7867              Video LC Metrics for RTCP XR             July 2016


Acknowledgements

   The author would like to thank Colin Perkins and Roni Even for their
   valuable comments.

Authors' Addresses

   Rachel Huang
   Huawei
   101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
   Nanjing 210012
   China

   Email: rachel.huang@huawei.com





































Huang                        Standards Track                   [Page 16]
^L