25.04.2014 Views

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!