Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) C. Holmberg
Request for Comments:
8858 Ericsson
Updates:
5761 January 2021
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Indicating Exclusive Support of RTP and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)
Multiplexing Using the Session Description Protocol (SDP)
Abstract
This document defines a new Session Description Protocol (SDP) media-
level attribute, 'rtcp-mux-only', that can be used by an endpoint to
indicate exclusive support of RTP and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)
multiplexing. The document also updates
RFC 5761 by clarifying that
an offerer can use a mechanism to indicate that it is not able to
send and receive RTCP on separate ports.
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/rfc8858.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
2. Conventions
3. SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' Attribute
4. SDP Offer/Answer Procedures
4.1. General
4.2. Generating the Initial SDP Offer
4.3. Generating the Answer
4.4. Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer
4.5. Modifying the Session
5. Update to
RFC 5761 5.1. General
5.2. Update to 4th Paragraph of Section 5.1.1
5.3. Update to 2nd Paragraph of Section 5.1.3
6. ICE Considerations
7. Security Considerations
8. IANA Considerations
9. References
9.1. Normative References
9.2. Informative References
Acknowledgements
Author's Address
1. Introduction
[
RFC5761] defines how to multiplex RTP and RTCP on a single IP
address and port, referred to as RTP/RTCP multiplexing. [
RFC5761]
also defines an SDP [
RFC4566] attribute, 'rtcp-mux', that can be used
by entities to indicate support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing and
negotiate usage of it.
As defined in [
RFC5761], if the peer endpoint does not support RTP/
RTCP multiplexing, both endpoints should use separate ports for
sending and receiving of RTCP (referred to as fallback to usage of
separate ports for RTP and RTCP).
Some newer applications that do not require backward compatibility
with peers that cannot multiplex RTCP might choose not to implement
separation of RTP and RTCP. Examples of such applications are W3C
WebRTC applications [WebRTC], which are not required to interoperate
with non-WebRTC clients. For such applications, this document
defines an SDP attribute to signal intent to require multiplexing.
The use of this attribute in SDP offers [
RFC3264] may harm the
interoperability of entities that ever need to interoperate with
peers that do not support RTC/RTCP multiplexing. Also, while the SDP
answerer [
RFC3264] might support, and prefer usage of, fallback to
nonmultiplex, the attribute indicates that fallback to nonmultiplex
cannot be enabled. One example of where nonmultiplex is preferred is
where an endpoint is connected to a radio interface and wants to use
different bearers (possibly with different quality characteristics)
for RTP and RTCP. Another example is where one endpoint is acting as
a gateway to a network where RTP/RTCP multiplexing cannot be used.
In such a case, the endpoint may also prefer nonmultiplexing towards
the other network. Otherwise, the endpoint would have to perform
demultiplexing of RTP and RTCP.
This document defines a new SDP media-level attribute, 'rtcp-mux-
only', that can be used by an endpoint to indicate exclusive support
of RTP/RTCP multiplexing. The document also updates [
RFC5761] by
clarifying that an offerer can use a mechanism to indicate that it is
not able to send and receive RTCP on separate ports.
This document also describes the Interactive Connectivity
Establishment (ICE) [
RFC8445] considerations when indicating
exclusive support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing.
2. 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.
3. SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' Attribute
This section defines a new SDP media-level attribute, 'rtcp-mux-
only'.
Name: rtcp-mux-only
Value: N/A
Usage Level: media
Charset Dependent: no
Syntax: rtcp-mux-only
Example: a=rtcp-mux-only
In an SDP offer, the offerer uses the SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute
to indicate exclusive support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing for the RTP-
based media associated with the SDP media description ("m=" line).
In an SDP answer, the 'rtcp-mux' attribute [
RFC5761] indicates that
the answerer supports, and accepts usage of, RTP/RTCP multiplexing
for the RTP-based media associated with the SDP media description
("m=" line).
The usage of the 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute in an SDP answer is
forbidden.
The usage of the SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute is only defined for
RTP-based media.
The mux category [
RFC8859] for the 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute is
"IDENTICAL", which means that the attribute, if used within a BUNDLE
group [
RFC8843], must be associated with all multiplexed RTP-based
media descriptions within the BUNDLE group.
The 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute applies to the whole associated media
description. The attribute
MUST NOT be defined per source (using the
SDP 'ssrc' attribute [
RFC5576]).
The SDP offer/answer procedures [
RFC3264] associated with the
attribute are defined in
Section 4.
4. SDP Offer/Answer Procedures
This section defines the SDP offer/answer procedures [
RFC3264] for
indicating exclusive support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing and negotiating
usage of it.
The procedures in this section apply to individual RTP-based SDP
media descriptions ("m=" lines).
4.2. Generating the Initial SDP Offer
When sending the initial offer, if the offerer wants to indicate
exclusive RTP/RTCP multiplexing for RTP-based media, it
MUST associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute with the associated SDP
media description ("m=" line).
In addition, if the offerer associates an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only'
attribute with an SDP media description ("m=" line), the offerer
MUST also associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux' attribute with the same SDP media
description ("m=" line), following the procedures in [
RFC5761].
If the offerer associates an SDP 'rtcp' attribute [
RFC3605] with an
SDP media description ("m=" line), and if the offerer also associates
an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute with the same SDP media description
("m=" line), the address and port values of the SDP 'rtcp' attribute
MUST match the corresponding values for RTP.
NOTE: This specification does not mandate the usage of the SDP 'rtcp'
attribute for RTP/RTCP multiplexing.
4.3. Generating the Answer
When an answerer receives an offer that contains an SDP 'rtcp-mux-
only' attribute associated with an RTP-based SDP media description
("m=" line), then if the answerer accepts the usage of RTP/RTCP
multiplexing, it
MUST associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux' attribute with the
corresponding SDP media description ("m=") in the associated answer,
following the procedures in [
RFC5761]. If the answerer does not
accept the usage of RTP/RTCP multiplexing, it
MUST either reject the
SDP media description ("m=") by setting the port value to zero in the
associated answer, or reject the whole offer, following the
procedures in [
RFC3264].
The answerer
MUST NOT associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute with
an SDP media description ("m=" line) in the answer.
4.4. Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer
If an offerer associated an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute with an
RTP-based SDP media description ("m=" line) in an offer, and if the
corresponding SDP media description ("m=" line) in the associated
answer contains an SDP 'rtcp-mux' attribute, the offerer
MUST apply
the RTP/RTCP multiplexing procedures [
RFC5761] to the associated RTP-
based media. If the corresponding SDP media description ("m=" line)
in the associated answer does not contain an SDP 'rtcp-mux'
attribute, the offerer
MUST either take appropriate actions in order
to disable the associated RTP-based media -- e.g., send a new offer
with a zero port value associated with the SDP media description
("m=" line) -- or send a new offer without associating an SDP 'rtcp-
mux-only' attribute with the SDP media description ("m=" line).
NOTE: This document does not mandate specific actions on how to
terminate the RTP media. The offerer might, for example, terminate
the RTP media by sending a new offer in which the port value of the
SDP media description is set to zero.
4.5. Modifying the Session
When an offerer sends a subsequent offer, if the offerer and answerer
have previously negotiated usage of exclusive RTP/RTCP multiplexing
for the media associated with an RTP-based SDP media description
("m=" line), the offerer
SHOULD associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' with
the corresponding SDP media description ("m=" line).
In addition, if the offerer associates an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only'
attribute with an SDP media description ("m=" line), the offerer
MUST also associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux' attribute with the same SDP media
description ("m=" line), following the procedures in [
RFC5761].
If the offerer does not associate the attributes with the
corresponding SDP media description ("m=" line), it is an indication
that the offerer no longer wants to use RTP/RTCP multiplexing and
instead
MUST fall back to usage of separate ports for RTP and RTCP
once the offer has been accepted by the answerer.
When an offerer sends a subsequent offer, if the offerer and answerer
have not previously negotiated usage of RTP/RTCP multiplexing for the
media associated with an RTP-based SDP media description ("m=" line),
the offerer
MAY indicate exclusive support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing,
following the procedures in
Section 4.2. The offerer
MUST process
the associated answer following the procedures in
Section 4.4.
It is
RECOMMENDED to not switch between usage of RTP/RTCP
multiplexing and usage of separate ports for RTP and RTCP in a
subsequent offer, unless there is a use case that mandates it.
5. Update to RFC 5761
This section updates Sections
5.1.
1 and
5.1.3 of [
RFC5761] by
clarifying that an offerer can use a mechanism to indicate that it is
not able to send and receive RTCP on separate ports, and that the
offerer shall terminate the affected streams if the answerer does not
indicate support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing. It also clarifies that,
when the offerer is not able to send and receive RTCP on separate
ports, the offerer will not provide an SDP 'candidate' attribute for
RTCP, nor will the offerer provide a fallback port for RTCP (using
the SDP 'rtcp' attribute).
5.2. Update to 4th Paragraph of Section 5.1.1
NOTE: [
RFC8035] also updates Section 5.1.1 of [
RFC5761]. While the
paragraph updated in this document is not updated by [
RFC8035], the
location of the paragraph within Section 5.1.1 is moved.
OLD TEXT:
| If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the
| offerer
MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.
| Instead, it should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated
| according to the usual port-selection rules (either the port pair,
| or a signalled port if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also
| included). This will occur when talking to a peer that does not
| understand the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute.
NEW TEXT:
| If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the
| offerer
MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.
| Instead, it should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated
| according to the usual port-selection rules (either the port pair,
| or a signaled port if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also
| included). This will occur when talking to a peer that does not
| understand the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute. However, if the offerer
| indicated in the offer that it is not able to send and receive
| RTCP on a separate port, the offerer
MUST disable the media
| streams associated with the attribute. The mechanism for
| indicating that the offerer is not able to send and receive RTCP
| on a separate port is outside the scope of this specification.
5.3. Update to 2nd Paragraph of Section 5.1.3
OLD TEXT:
| If it is desired to use both ICE and multiplexed RTP and RTCP, the
| initial offer
MUST contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute to indicate
| that RTP and RTCP multiplexing is desired and
MUST contain
| "a=candidate:" lines for both RTP and RTCP along with an "a=rtcp:"
| line indicating a fallback port for RTCP in the case that the
| answerer does not support RTP and RTCP multiplexing. This
MUST be
| done for each media where RTP and RTCP multiplexing is desired.
NEW TEXT:
| If it is desired to use both ICE and multiplexed RTP and RTCP, the
| initial offer
MUST contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute to indicate
| that RTP and RTCP multiplexing is desired and
MUST contain
| "a=candidate:" lines for both RTP and RTCP along with an "a=rtcp:"
| line indicating a fallback port for RTCP in the case that the
| answerer does not support RTP and RTCP multiplexing. This
MUST be
| done for each media where RTP and RTCP multiplexing is desired.
| However, if the offerer indicates in the offer that it is not able
| to send and receive RTCP on a separate port, the offerer
MUST NOT | include "a=candidate:" lines for RTCP and
MUST NOT provide a
| fallback port for RTCP using the "a=rtcp:" line.
6. ICE Considerations
As defined in [
RFC8445], if an entity is aware that the remote peer
supports, and is willing to use, RTP/RTCP multiplexing, the entity
will only provide RTP candidates (component ID 1). However, only
providing RTP candidates does not, as such, imply exclusive support
of RTP/RTCP multiplexing. RTCP candidates also would not be provided
in cases where RTCP is not supported at all. Therefore, additional
information is needed in order to indicate support of exclusive RTP/
RTCP multiplexing. This document defines such a mechanism using the
SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute.
7. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce new security considerations beyond
those specified in [
RFC3605] and [
RFC5761].
8. IANA Considerations
This document updates the "Session Description Protocol Parameters"
registry as specified in Section 8.2.4 of [
RFC4566]. Specifically,
it adds the SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute to the table for SDP media-
level attributes.
Attribute name: rtcp-mux-only
Type of attribute: media-level
Subject to charset: no
Purpose: Indicate exclusive support of RTP/RTCP multiplexing
Appropriate Values: N/A
Contact name: Christer Holmberg (christer.holmberg@ericsson.com)
Mux Category: IDENTICAL
9. References
9.1. 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,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[
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>.
[
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>.
[
RFC5761] Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Multiplexing RTP Data and
Control Packets on a Single Port",
RFC 5761,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC5761, April 2010,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5761>.
[
RFC8035] Holmberg, C., "Session Description Protocol (SDP) Offer/
Answer Clarifications for RTP/RTCP Multiplexing",
RFC 8035, DOI 10.17487/
RFC8035, November 2016,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8035>.
[
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>.
[
RFC8445] Keranen, A., Holmberg, C., and J. Rosenberg, "Interactive
Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network
Address Translator (NAT) Traversal",
RFC 8445,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC8445, July 2018,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8445>.
[
RFC8843] Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings,
"Negotiating Media Multiplexing Using the Session
Description Protocol (SDP)",
RFC 8843,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC8843, January 2021,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8843>.
[
RFC8859] Nandakumar, S., "A Framework for Session Description
Protocol (SDP) Attributes When Multiplexing",
RFC 8859,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC8859, January 2021,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8859>.
9.2. Informative References
[
RFC3605] Huitema, C., "Real Time Control Protocol (RTCP) attribute
in Session Description Protocol (SDP)",
RFC 3605,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC3605, October 2003,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3605>.
[
RFC5576] Lennox, J., Ott, J., and T. Schierl, "Source-Specific
Media Attributes in the Session Description Protocol
(SDP)",
RFC 5576, DOI 10.17487/
RFC5576, June 2009,
<
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5576>.
[WebRTC] Jennings, C., Boström, H., and J-I. Bruaroey, "WebRTC 1.0:
Real-time Communication Between Browsers", W3C Proposed
Recommendation, <
https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/>.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Roman Shpount, Paul Kyzivat, Ari Keränen, Bo Burman, Tomas
Frankkila, and Martin Thomson for their comments and input on the
document. Thanks to Francis Dupont for the GENART review.
Author's Address
Christer Holmberg
Ericsson
Hirsalantie 11
FI-02420 Jorvas
Finland