Revision Summary Date Revision History Revision Class Comments 4/4/2008 0.1 New Initial version 4/25/2008 0.2 Minor Updated based on feedback 6/27/2008 1.0 Major Updated and revised the technical content. 8/15/2008 1.01 Minor Revised and edited the technical content. 12/12/2008 2.0 Major Updated and revised the technical content. 2/13/2009 2.01 Minor Updated the technical content. 3/13/2009 2.02 Minor Updated the technical content. 7/13/2009 2.03 Major Revised and edited the technical content 8/28/2009 2.04 Editorial Revised and edited the technical content 11/6/2009 2.05 Editorial Revised and edited the technical content 2/19/2010 2.06 Editorial Revised and edited the technical content 3/31/2010 2.07 Updated and revised the technical content
4/30/2010 2.08 Editorial Revised and edited the technical content 6/7/2010 2.09 Minor Updated the technical content 6/29/2010 2.10 Editorial Changed language and formatting in the technical content. 7/23/2010 2.10 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 9/27/2010 3.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content. 11/15/2010 3.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 12/17/2010 3.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 3/18/2011 3.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the
technical content. 6/10/2011 3.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 1/20/2012 4.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content. 4/11/2012 4.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 7/16/2012 4.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 10/8/2012 4.0.1 Editorial Changed language and formatting in the technical content. 2/11/2013 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 7/30/2013 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or
formatting of the technical content. 11/18/2013 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 2/10/2014 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 4/30/2014 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 7/31/2014 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 10/30/2014 4.0.1 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 3/30/2015 5.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content.
9/4/2015 5.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 7/15/2016 5.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 9/14/2016 5.0 None No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content. 4/27/2018 6.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content. 7/24/2018 7.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content. 8/28/2018 8.0 Major Significantly changed the technical content.
Protocol Details Sender Details This section covers the role of the sender of . Abstract Data Model None. Timers None. Initialization None. Higher-Layer Triggered Events Send a RTVideo Whenever higher layers send an , the video frame MUST be fragmented if it does not fit in one and the appropriate format MUST be used to packetize the video fragments. Message Processing Events and Sequencing Rules The sender specifies the packetization process. When the sender receives a frame from higher layers, the RTVideo sender fragments the video frame into multiple data fragments and adds the format header before each packet. An RTP payload format MUST be selected to send a video frame, as specified in section . Choice of RTP Payload Format The receiver might not be able to decode a video frame if the reference frame is missing, or the receiver might manage to decode the frame, but with undesirable video artifacts. The RTVideo Extended RTP Payload Format (section ) provides a way to reduce video artifacts by detecting and dropping the video frames for which reference frames are missing. This not only reduces the undesirable artifacts, it also reduces CPU usage. The RTVideo Extended RTP Payload Format SHOULD be used. If protection against packet loss is desired, and the application can afford the cost of extra bandwidth, the RTVideo FEC RTP Payload Format (section ) can be used together with the RTVideo Extended RTP Payload Format. When minimizing resource use is desired or if reducing the video artifacts is desired, the RTVideo Basic RTP Payload Format (section ) can be used. The RTVideo Extended 2 RTP Payload Format (section ) is reserved for future extensions. It MUST NOT be used.
19 I 31 31 7 Initialization 22 19 6 L Local events 24 22 M 20 Message processing 23 19 19 20 20 22 21 20 10 Messages 10 11 14 12 16 10 10 N 7 O 22 7 P 31 8 8 32 R 22 Receiver 22 22 22 24 24 22 Reciever 23 23 7 7 7 8 21 10 11 14 12 16 S Security 31 31 19 Sender 19 19 19 22 19 19 22 19 Sequencing rules 23 19 21 9 T events 24 22 Timers 22 19 34 10 U 20 V 9 8