Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) T. Terriberry
Request for Comments: 7007 Mozilla Corporation
Updates: 3551 August 2013
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) T. Terriberry
Request for Comments: 7007 Mozilla Corporation
Updates: 3551 August 2013
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Update to Remove DVI4 from the Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP)
更新以从RTP配置文件的推荐编解码器中删除DVI4，用于具有最小控制的音频和视频会议（RTP/AVP）
Abstract
摘要
The RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP) is the basis for many other profiles, such as the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP/SAVP), the Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF), and the Extended Secure RTP Profile for RTCP-Based Feedback (RTP/SAVPF). This document updates RFC 3551, the RTP/AVP profile (and by extension, the profiles that build upon it), to reflect changes in audio codec usage since that document was originally published.
最小控制音频和视频会议的RTP配置文件（RTP/AVP）是许多其他配置文件的基础，例如安全实时传输协议（RTP/SAVP）、基于实时传输控制协议（RTCP）的反馈扩展RTP配置文件（RTP/AVPF）和基于RTCP的反馈扩展安全RTP配置文件（RTP/SAVPF）. 本文档更新了RFC 3551，即RTP/AVP配置文件（以及在此基础上扩展的配置文件），以反映自该文档最初发布以来音频编解码器使用的变化。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
这是一份互联网标准跟踪文件。
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 5741.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关互联网标准的更多信息，请参见RFC 5741第2节。
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/rfc7007.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7007.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2013 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
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.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Terminology .....................................................2
3. Updates to RFC 3551 .............................................3
3.1. Updates to Section 6 of RFC 3551 ...........................3
4. Security Considerations .........................................3
5. Acknowledgments .................................................3
6. References ......................................................4
6.1. Normative References .......................................4
6.2. Informative References .....................................4
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Terminology .....................................................2
3. Updates to RFC 3551 .............................................3
3.1. Updates to Section 6 of RFC 3551 ...........................3
4. Security Considerations .........................................3
5. Acknowledgments .................................................3
6. References ......................................................4
6.1. Normative References .......................................4
6.2. Informative References .....................................4
[RFC3551] says that audio applications operating under the RTP/AVP profile SHOULD be able to send and receive PCMU and DVI4. However, in practice, many RTP deployments do not support DVI4, and there is little reason to use it when much more modern codecs are available. This document updates the recommended audio codec selection for the RTP/AVP profile and removes the SHOULD for DVI4. By extension, this also updates the profiles that build on RTP/AVP, including RTP/SAVP [RFC3711], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], and RTP/SAVPF [RFC5124].
[RFC3551]表示，在RTP/AVP模式下运行的音频应用程序应该能够发送和接收PCMU和DVI4。然而，在实践中，许多RTP部署不支持DVI4，当有更多的现代编解码器可用时，几乎没有理由使用它。本文档更新了RTP/AVP配置文件的推荐音频编解码器选择，并删除了DVI4的“应”。通过扩展，这也更新了构建在RTP/AVP上的配置文件，包括RTP/SAVP[RFC3711]、RTP/AVPF[RFC4585]和RTP/SAVPF[RFC5124]。
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].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“必需”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照[RFC2119]中所述进行解释。
The following text of [RFC3551] is hereby updated as set forth in Section 3.1:
[RFC3551]的以下文本特此更新，如第3.1节所述：
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4). This allows interoperability without format negotiation and ensures successful negotiation with a conference control protocol.
在此配置文件下运行的音频应用程序应至少能够发送和/或接收有效负载类型0（PCMU）和5（DVI4）。这允许互操作性而无需格式协商，并确保与会议控制协议的协商成功。
This document updates the final paragraph of Section 6 of RFC 3551 by replacing "payload types 0 (PCMU) and 5 (DVI4)" with "payload type 0 (PCMU)". We also add a final sentence to that paragraph that states, "Some environments necessitate support for PCMU". This results in the following paragraph:
本文件更新了RFC 3551第6节的最后一段，将“有效载荷类型0（PCMU）和5（DVI4）”替换为“有效载荷类型0（PCMU）”。我们还在该段中添加了最后一句话，指出“某些环境需要支持PCMU”。这将导致以下段落：
Audio applications operating under this profile SHOULD, at a minimum, be able to send and/or receive payload type 0 (PCMU). This allows interoperability without format negotiation and ensures successful negotiation with a conference control protocol. Some environments necessitate support for PCMU.
在此配置文件下运行的音频应用程序应至少能够发送和/或接收有效负载类型0（PCMU）。这允许互操作性而无需格式协商，并确保与会议控制协议的协商成功。有些环境需要支持PCMU。
This document does not introduce any new security considerations for [RFC3551].
本文档没有为[RFC3551]引入任何新的安全注意事项。
Thanks to Colin Perkins for suggesting this update.
感谢Colin Perkins提出此更新。
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551, July 2003.
[RFC3551]Schulzrinne，H.和S.Casner，“具有最小控制的音频和视频会议的RTP配置文件”，STD 65，RFC 3551，2003年7月。
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 3711, March 2004.
[RFC3711]Baugher，M.，McGrew，D.，Naslund，M.，Carrara，E.，和K.Norrman，“安全实时传输协议（SRTP）”，RFC 37112004年3月。
[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, July 2006.
[RFC4585]Ott，J.，Wenger，S.，Sato，N.，Burmeister，C.，和J.Rey，“基于实时传输控制协议（RTCP）的反馈（RTP/AVPF）的扩展RTP配置文件”，RFC 45852006年7月。
[RFC5124] Ott, J. and E. Carrara, "Extended Secure RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/SAVPF)", RFC 5124, February 2008.
[RFC5124]Ott，J.和E.Carrara，“基于实时传输控制协议（RTCP）的反馈扩展安全RTP配置文件（RTP/SAVPF）”，RFC 51242008年2月。
Author's Address
作者地址
Timothy B. Terriberry Mozilla Corporation 650 Castro Street Mountain View, CA 94041 USA
美国加利福尼亚州山景城卡斯特罗街650号Timothy B.Terriberry Mozilla Corporation 94041
Phone: +1 650 903-0800
EMail: tterribe@xiph.org
Phone: +1 650 903-0800
EMail: tterribe@xiph.org