Full Text:
<3956>
CLC number: TN919.8
On-line Access: 2024-08-27
Received: 2023-10-17
Revision Accepted: 2024-05-08
Crosschecked: 0000-00-00
Cited: 0
Clicked: 6416
RTP payload format for H.264/SVC scalable video coding
| |||||||||||||
Wenger Stephan, Wang Ye-kui, Hannuksela Miska M.. RTP payload format for H.264/SVC scalable video coding[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science A, 2006, 7(5): 657-667.
@article{title="RTP payload format for H.264/SVC scalable video coding",
author="Wenger Stephan, Wang Ye-kui, Hannuksela Miska M.",
journal="Journal of Zhejiang University Science A",
volume="7",
number="5",
pages="657-667",
year="2006",
publisher="Zhejiang University Press & Springer",
doi="10.1631/jzus.2006.A0657"
}
%0 Journal Article
%T RTP payload format for H.264/SVC scalable video coding
%A Wenger Stephan
%A Wang Ye-kui
%A Hannuksela Miska M.
%J Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A
%V 7
%N 5
%P 657-667
%@ 1673-565X
%D 2006
%I Zhejiang University Press & Springer
%DOI 10.1631/jzus.2006.A0657
TY - JOUR
T1 - RTP payload format for H.264/SVC scalable video coding
A1 - Wenger Stephan
A1 - Wang Ye-kui
A1 - Hannuksela Miska M.
J0 - Journal of Zhejiang University Science A
VL - 7
IS - 5
SP - 657
EP - 667
%@ 1673-565X
Y1 - 2006
PB - Zhejiang University Press & Springer
ER -
DOI - 10.1631/jzus.2006.A0657
Abstract: The scalable extension of h.264/AVC, known as scalable video coding or SVC, is currently the main focus of the Joint Video Team’s work. In its present working draft, the higher level syntax of SVC follows the design principles of h.264/AVC. Self-contained network abstraction layer units (NAL units) form natural entities for packetization. The SVC specification is by no means finalized yet, but nevertheless the work towards an optimized RTP payload format has already started. RFC 3984, the RTP payload specification for h.264/AVC has been taken as a starting point, but it became quickly clear that the scalable features of SVC require adaptation in at least the areas of capability/operation point signaling and documentation of the extended NAL unit header. This paper first gives an overview of the history of scalable video coding, and then reviews the video coding layer (VCL) and NAL of the latest SVC draft specification. Finally, it discusses different aspects of the draft SVC RTP payload format, including the design criteria, use cases, signaling and payload structure.
[1] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., Norrman, K., 2004. The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP). RFC 3711, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3711.txt.
[2] Fenner, W., 1997. Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2. RFC 2236, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2236.txt.
[3] Handley, M., 1998. GeRM: Generic RTP Multiplexing. Internet Draft, Work in Progress, Expired. Available from http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/I-D/draft-ietf-avt-germ-00.txt.
[4] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., 1998. SDP: Session Description Protocol. RFC 2327, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2327.txt.
[5] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., Perkins, C., 2005. SDP: Session Description Protocol. Internet Draft, Work in Progress. Available from http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-25.txt.
[6] ISO/IEC JTC1, 1992. Information Technology—Coding of Audio-visual Objects, Part 2: Visual. ISO/IEC 11176-2 (MPEG-1).
[7] ISO/IEC JTC1, 1998. Information Technology—Coding of Audio-visual Objects, Part 2: Visual. ISO/IEC 14496-2 (MPEG-4).
[8] ISO/IEC MPEG, 2005. SVC Requirements Specified by MPEG. JVT-N026, available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/jvt-n026.doc.
[9] ITU-T, 1998. Video Coding for Low Bitrate Communication. ITU-T Recommendation H.263, Version 2.
[10] ITU-T, 2003. Advanced Video Coding for Generic Audiovisual Services. ITU-T Recommendation H.264.
[11] ITU-T and ISO/IEC JTC1, 1994. Generic Coding of Moving Pictures and Associated Audio Information, Part 2: Video. ITU-T Recommendation H.262, ISO/IEC 13818-2 (MPEG-2).
[12] ITU-T VCEG, 2005. SVC Requirements Specified by VCEG. JVT-N027, available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/jvt-n027.doc.
[13] Jacobson, V., McCanne, S., Vetterli, M., 1996. Receiver-Driven Layered Multicast. Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM’96. Stanford, CA, p.117-130.
[14] Joint Video Team, 2005a. Scalable Video Coding—Working Draft 1. Available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_01_HongKong/JV T-N020d1.zip.
[15] Joint Video Team, 2005b. Scalable Video Coding—Working Draft 4. Available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_10_Nice/JVT-Q201d1.zip.
[16] Joint Video Team, 2005c. Joint Scalable Video Model— JSVM-4. Available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2005_10_Nice/JVT-Q202.zip.
[17] Jones, H.W., 1979. A comparison of theoretical and experimental video compression designs. IEEE Trans. on Electromag. Compat., 21(1):50-56.
[18] Li, W., 2001. Overview of fine granular scalability in MPEG-4 video standard. IEEE CSVT, 11(3):301-317.
[19] Li, A., 2005. FEC Grouping Semantics in SDP. Internet Draft, Work in Progress. Available from http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-fec-grouping-02.txt.
[20] Ohm, J.R., 2005. Advances in scalable video coding. Proceeding of the IEEE, 93(1):42-56.
[21] Reader, C., 2002. History of Video Compression. Draft Version 2.0, JVT-D-068, available from http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/jvt-site/2002_07_Klagenfurt/JVT-D068.doc.
[22] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Gamarilllo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., Schooler, E., 2002. SIP: Session Initiation Protocol. RFC 3261, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt.
[23] Schierl, T., Wiegand, T., Kampmann, M., 2005. 3GPP Compliant Adaptive Wireless Video Streaming Using AVC. Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.
[24] Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., Lanphier, R., 1998. Real Time Streaming Protocol. RFC2326, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2326.txt.
[25] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., Jacobson, V., 2003. RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications. RFC 3550, STD 64, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3550.txt.
[26] Schwarz, H., Hinz, T., Marpe, D., Wiegand, T., 2005. Constrained Inter-Layer Prediction for Single-Loop Decoding in Spatial Scalability. Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.
[27] Thompson, B., Koren, T., Wing, D., 2005. Tunneling Multiplexed Compressed RTP (TCRTP). RFC 4170, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4170.txt.
[28] Tian, D., Hannuksela, M.M., Gabbouj, M., 2005a. Subsequence Video Coding for Improved Temporal Scalability. Proc. of IEEE Int. Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS).
[29] Tian, D., Malamal Vadakital, V.K., Hannuksela, M.M., Wenger, S., Gabbouj, M., 2005b. Improved H.264/AVC Video Broadcast/Multicast. Proc. of Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP).
[30] Vitali, A., Fumagalli, M., 2005. Standard-compatible Multiple-Description Coding (MDC) and Layered Coding (LC) of Audio/Video Streams. Internet Draft, Work in Progress. Available from http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-vtali-ietf-avt-mdc-lc-00.txt.
[31] Wenger, S., Wang, Y.K., 2005. RTP Payload Format for SVC Video. Internet Draft, Work in Progress. Available from http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wenger-avt-rtp-svc-00.txt.
[32] Wenger, S., Hannuksela, M.M., Stockhammer, T., Westerlund, M., Singer, D., 2005. RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video. RFC 3984, available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3984.txt.
Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion
<1>