TITRE Adaptive Packet Video Streaming Over IP Networks - LaBRI
TITRE Adaptive Packet Video Streaming Over IP Networks - LaBRI
TITRE Adaptive Packet Video Streaming Over IP Networks - LaBRI
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
• Some MPEG-4 elementary streams must be reliably delivered. An example of<br />
theses streams, we can find a control streams BIFS and OD, or streaming media such<br />
as Java class (MPEG-J) files. It is necessary to transport this media in reliable manner.<br />
There is no works that define clearly how to transport this kind of media.<br />
• Addressing the issue of DMIF session management.<br />
• Timing model. MPEG-4 and RTP have different timing models. It is desired to<br />
synchronize MPEG-4 data with data using a native RTP packetization we must align<br />
the models (capture time vs. composition time).<br />
Figure 4-9 illustrates the approaches of encapsulating MPEG-4 stream over <strong>IP</strong> compared to<br />
the ISO MPEG-4 standard approach. To deal with some of the open issues cited later, we have<br />
developed an RTP payload formats for transporting MPEG-4 Audio Visual Object over RTP<br />
protocol called RTP4Mux.<br />
<strong>Video</strong><br />
Fragmentation<br />
Compression Layer<br />
Elementary Streams<br />
Sync Layer<br />
Reduced<br />
Sync Layer<br />
Sync Layer<br />
FlexMux<br />
Delivery<br />
Layer<br />
RTP<br />
UDP<br />
<strong>IP</strong><br />
RTP<br />
UDP<br />
<strong>IP</strong><br />
RTP<br />
UDP<br />
<strong>IP</strong><br />
MPEG-4 Standard<br />
Alternative approach<br />
Figure 4-9: Concurrent approaches for encapsulating MPEG-4 stream over the <strong>IP</strong> networks<br />
4.2.2 An RTP Payload for MPEG-4 Audio / Visual Object<br />
Classical payload format supports a fragmentation mechanism where the full AUs or the<br />
partial AUs passed by the compression layer are fragmented at arbitrary boundaries. This may<br />
result in fragments that are not independently decodable. This kind of fragmentation may be used<br />
in situations when the RTP packets are not allowed to exceed the path-MTU size.<br />
However, this fragmentation is not recommended for error resilience. It is preferable that the<br />
compression layer provides partial AUs, in the form of typed segments, of a size small enough so<br />
that the resulting RTP packet can fit the MTU size.<br />
Consecutive segments (e.g. video frames) of the same type can be packed consecutively in the<br />
same RTP payload. The compression layer should provide partial AUs, of a size small enough so<br />
that the resulting RTP packet can fit the MTU size. Note that passing partial AUs of small size will<br />
also facilitate congestion and rate control based on the real output buffer management. RTP<br />
packets that transport fragments belonging to the same AU will have their RTP timestamp set to<br />
78