rfc9751.original		rfc9751.txt
	AVTCORE M. Westerlund		Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Westerlund
	Internet-Draft Ericsson		Request for Comments: 9751 Ericsson
	Updates: 8088 (if approved) 18 October 2024		Updates: 8088 March 2025
	Intended status: Standards Track		Category: Standards Track
	Expires: 21 April 2025		ISSN: 2070-1721
	Closing the RTP Payload Format Media Types IANA Registry		Closing the RTP Payload Format Media Types Registry
	draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry-05
	Abstract		Abstract
	A number of authors of RTP Payload Formats and the WG process have		A number of authors defining RTP payload formats and the Working
	failed to ensure that the media types for RTP payload formats is		Group process have failed to ensure that the media types are
	registred in the IANA registry "RTP Payload Formats Media Types" as		registered in the IANA "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry as
	recommended by RFC 8088. To simplify the process and rely only on		recommended by RFC 8088. To simplify the process and rely only on
	the media types registry this document closes the RTP payload		the "Media Types" registry, this document closes the RTP payload-
	specific registry. In addition it updates the instruction to payload		specific registry. In addition, it updates the instruction in RFC
	format authors in RFC 8088 to reflect this change.		8088 to reflect this change.
	About This Document
	This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
	Status information for this document may be found at
	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-
	registry/.
	Discussion of this document takes place on the AVTCORE Working Group
	mailing list (mailto:avt@ietf.org), which is archived at
	https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/avt/. Subscribe at
	https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt/.
	Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
	https://github.com/gloinul/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This is an Internet Standards Track document.
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		received public review and has been approved for publication by the
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
			Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 April 2025.		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/rfc9751.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are		include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
	provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.		Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
			in the Revised BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction
	2. Update to How To Write an RTP Payload Format . . . . . . . . 3		2. Update to How to Write an RTP Payload Format
	3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3. IANA Considerations
	4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		4. Security Considerations
	5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		5. References
	5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		5.1. Normative References
	5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		5.2. Informative References
	Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		Acknowledgments
	Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		Author's Address
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	It has been observed that specifications of new Real-time Transport		Some times, authors defining new Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP)
	Protocol (RTP) payload formats often forget to specify registration		payload formats forgot to specify registration of the format's media
	of the format's media type in the IANA registry "RTP Payload Formats		type in the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS]
	Media Types" [RTP-FORMATS] as recommended by [RFC8088]. In practice		as recommended by [RFC8088]. In practice, this has no real impact.
	this has no real impact. This registry is not used for any purpose		This registry is not used for any purpose other than to track which
	other than to track which media types actually have RTP payload		media types actually have RTP payload formats, which can be done
	formats. That purpose could be addressed through other means.		through other means.
	The Media Types registry [MEDIA-TYPES] is the crucial registry to		It is required that media types be registered in the "Media Types"
	register any Media Type to establish the media type used to identify		registry [MEDIA-TYPES] to identify the format in various signalling
	the format in various signalling usages, to avoid collisions, and to		usages, avoid collisions, and reference the defining specifications.
	reference their specifications.
	To resolve this situation, this document performs the following		To resolve this situation, this document:
	actions. First, it updates the registry to include known RTP payload
	formats at the time of writing. Then, it closes the IANA Registry
	for RTP Payload Formats Media Types for future registration. Beyond
	instructing IANA to close this registry, the instructions to authors
	in [RFC8088] are updated so that registration in the closed registry
	is no longer mentioned.
	The origins of the "RTP Payload Formats Media Types" registry, as		* updates the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry to include
			known RTP payload formats at the time of writing,
			* closes the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry to future
			registrations and lists this RFC as a reference, and
			* removes from [RFC8088] the instruction to register RTP payload
			formats in the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry.
			The origins of the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry, as
	referenced in [RTP-FORMATS], are unclear. The registry cites		referenced in [RTP-FORMATS], are unclear. The registry cites
	[RFC4855] as providing the instructions for its maintenance.		[RFC4855] as providing the instructions for its maintenance.
	However, upon reviewing RFC 4855, no text has been found that defines		However, upon reviewing RFC 4855, no text has been found that defines
	the registry's purpose and operational rules. Further attempts to		the registry's purpose and operational rules. Further attempts to
	trace the registry's creation have failed to uncover any references		trace the registry's creation have failed to uncover any references
	to its establishment. It is likely that the registry was created		to its establishment. It is likely that the registry was created
	based on correspondence via email or at the request of an Area		based on email correspondence or at the request of an Area Director.
	Director (AD). Consequently, there is no known existing		Consequently, there is no known specification for this registry that
	specification for this registry that requires updating upon its		requires updating upon its closure.
	closure.
	2. Update to How To Write an RTP Payload Format		2. Update to How to Write an RTP Payload Format
	How to write an RTP Payload format [RFC8088] mandates in its section		The IANA Considerations section of "How to write an RTP Payload
	on IANA Considerations (Section 7.4) that RTP Payload formats shall		Format" (Section 7.4 of [RFC8088]) mandates that RTP payload formats
	register in RTP Payload Format media types. This paragraph is		shall be registered in the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry.
	changed without affecting its status as part of an informational RFC.		The following paragraph is updated as shown below, thus removing the
	Thus removing the need to register in the "RTP Payload Format media		need for media types to be registered in the "RTP Payload Format
	types".		Media Types" registry. Note that this update does not impact the
			rest of RFC 8088's status as an Informational RFC.
	OLD:		OLD:
	"Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,		| Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,
	they also need an IANA Considerations section. The media type name		| they also need an IANA Considerations section. The media type
	must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA register		| name must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA
	that media name. When that registration request is written, it shall		| register that media name. When that registration request is
	also be requested that the media type is included under the "RTP		| written, it shall also be requested that the media type is
	Payload Format media types" sub-registry of the RTP registry		| included under the "RTP Payload Format media types" sub-registry
	(http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters)."		| of the RTP registry (http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-
			| parameters).
	NEW:		NEW:
	"Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,		| Since all RTP payload formats contain a media type specification,
	they also need an IANA Considerations section. The media type name		| they also need an IANA Considerations section. The media type
	must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA register		| name must be registered, and this is done by requesting that IANA
	that media name in the Media Types registry		| register that media name in the "Media Types" registry
	(https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml)."		| (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/).
	3. IANA Considerations		3. IANA Considerations
	IANA is requested to add the following missing RTP Payload types to		IANA has added the following RTP payload types to the "RTP Payload
	the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].		Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].
	+=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+		+=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+
	| Media Type | Sub Type | Clock | Channels | Reference |		| Media Type | Subtype | Clock | Channels | Reference |
	| | | Rate (Hz) | (audio) | |		| | | Rate (Hz) | (audio) | |
	+=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+		+=============+==========+===========+==========+==================+
	| application | flexfec | | | RFC8627 |		| application | flexfec | | | RFC 8627 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | EVRCNW | 16000 | | RFC6884 |		| audio | EVRCNW | 16000 | | RFC 6884 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | EVRCNW0 | 16000 | | RFC6884 |		| audio | EVRCNW0 | 16000 | | RFC 6884 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | EVRCNW1 | 16000 | | RFC6884 |		| audio | EVRCNW1 | 16000 | | RFC 6884 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | aptx | | | RFC7310 |		| audio | aptx | | | RFC 7310 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | opus | 48000 | | RFC7587 |		| audio | opus | 48000 | | RFC 7587 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | G711-0 | | | RFC7650 |		| audio | G711-0 | | | RFC 7650 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| audio | flexfec | | | RFC8627 |		| audio | flexfec | | | RFC 8627 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| text | flexfec | | | RFC8627 |		| text | flexfec | | | RFC 8627 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| text | ttml+xml | | | RFC8759 |		| text | ttml+xml | | | RFC 8759 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | VP8 | 90000 | | RFC7741 |		| video | VP8 | 90000 | | RFC 7741 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | AV1 | 90000 | | [AV1-Media-Type] |		| video | AV1 | 90000 | | [AV1-Media-Type] |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | HEVC | 90000 | | RFC7798 |		| video | HEVC | 90000 | | RFC 7798 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | smpte291 | | | RFC8331 |		| video | smpte291 | | | RFC 8331 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | VVC | 90000 | | RFC9328 |		| video | VVC | 90000 | | RFC 9328 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | EVC | 90000 | | RFC9584 |		| video | EVC | 90000 | | RFC 9584 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	| video | flexfec | | | RFC8627 |		| video | flexfec | | | RFC 8627 |
	+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+		+-------------+----------+-----------+----------+------------------+
	Table 1: Payload Types to Register in RTP Payload Format Media Types		Table 1: Payload Types Added to the RTP Payload Format Media
			Types Registry
	IANA is requested to update the following RTP Payload types in the		IANA has updated the following entries in the "RTP Payload Format
	"RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].		Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS].
	+============+===========+=================+==========+===========+		+============+===========+=================+==========+===========+
	| Media Type | Sub Type | Clock Rate (Hz) | Channels | Reference |		| Media Type | Subtype | Clock Rate (Hz) | Channels | Reference |
	| | | | (audio) | |		| | | | (audio) | |
	+============+===========+=================+==========+===========+		+============+===========+=================+==========+===========+
	| audio | MP4A-LATM | | | RFC6416 |		| audio | MP4A-LATM | | | RFC 6416 |
	+------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+		+------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+
	| video | MP4V-ES | 90000 | | RFC6416 |		| video | MP4V-ES | 90000 | | RFC 6416 |
	+------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+		+------------+-----------+-----------------+----------+-----------+
	Table 2: Payload Types to update in RTP Payload Format Media Types		Table 2: Payload Types Updated in RTP Payload Format Media
			Types Registry
	IANA is further requested to close the "RTP Payload Format Media		IANA has also closed the "RTP Payload Format Media Types" registry
	Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS] for any further registrations. IANA		[RTP-FORMATS] to any further registrations. IANA added the following
	should add the following to the existing note for the registry:		to the registry note:
	NEW:		NEW:
	"This registry has been closed as it was considered redundant as all		| This registry has been closed; it was considered redundant because
	RTP Payload formats are part of the Media Types registry		| all RTP payload formats are part of the [Media Types registry]
	(https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml).		| (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types). See RFC 9751 for
	For further motivation see (RFC-TBD1)."		| further details.
	In addition, it is requested that the existing note of "RTP Payload		In addition, IANA updated the note in the "RTP Payload Format Media
	Format Media Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS] is changed in the		Types" registry [RTP-FORMATS] as follows:
	following way:
	OLD: Registration procedures and a registration template can be found		OLD:
	in [RFC4855].
	NEW: It was previously stated that registration procedures and a		| Registration procedures and a registration template can be found
	registration template can be found in [RFC4855]. This is not		| in [RFC4855].
	actually the case as discussed by [RFC-TBD1].
	RFC-Editor Note: Please replace RFC-TBD1 with the RFC number of this		NEW:
	specification and then remove this note.
			| It was previously stated that registration procedures and a
			| registration template can be found in [RFC4855]. As documented in
			| RFC 9751, this is not the case.
	4. Security Considerations		4. Security Considerations
	This document has no security considerations as it defines an		This document has no security considerations as it defines an
	administrative rule change.		administrative rule change.
	5. References		5. References
	5.1. Normative References		5.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[AV1-Media-Type]
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		IANA, "video/AV1",
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/video/AV1>.
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
			[MEDIA-TYPES]
			IANA, "Media Types",
			<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types>.
	[RFC8088] Westerlund, M., "How to Write an RTP Payload Format",		[RFC8088] Westerlund, M., "How to Write an RTP Payload Format",
	RFC 8088, DOI 10.17487/RFC8088, May 2017,		RFC 8088, DOI 10.17487/RFC8088, May 2017,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8088>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8088>.
	[RTP-FORMATS]		[RTP-FORMATS]
	"IANA's registry for RTP Payload Format Media Types",		IANA, "RTP Payload Format Media Types",
	November 2023, <https://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-		<https://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters>.
	parameters/rtp-parameters.xhtml#rtp-parameters-2>.
	[MEDIA-TYPES]
	"IANA's registry for Media Types", November 2023,
	<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-
	types.xhtml>.
	[AV1-Media-Type]
	"IANA Media Type Entry for video/AV1", January 2021,
	<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/video/AV1>.
	5.2. Informative References		5.2. Informative References
	[RFC4855] Casner, S., "Media Type Registration of RTP Payload		[RFC4855] Casner, S., "Media Type Registration of RTP Payload
	Formats", RFC 4855, DOI 10.17487/RFC4855, February 2007,		Formats", RFC 4855, DOI 10.17487/RFC4855, February 2007,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4855>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4855>.
	Appendix A. Acknowledgments		Acknowledgments
	The author likes to thank Jonathan Lennox, Zaheduzzaman Sarker,		The author thanks Jonathan Lennox, Zaheduzzaman Sarker, Bernard
	Bernard Aboba, Elwyn Davies, Wes Hardaker, Gunter Van de Velde, Éric		Aboba, Elwyn Davies, Wes Hardaker, Gunter Van de Velde, Éric Vyncke,
	Vyncke, Mahesh Jethanandani, and Hyunsik Yang for review and		Mahesh Jethanandani, and Hyunsik Yang for their reviews and editorial
	editorial fixes.		fixes.
	Author's Address		Author's Address
	Magnus Westerlund		Magnus Westerlund
	Ericsson		Ericsson
	Email: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com		Email: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
End of changes. 53 change blocks.
	164 lines changed or deleted		143 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48.