RFC 2833: RTP Payload for DTMF Digits, Telephony Tones and Telephony Signals
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 4733, RFC 4734.
Current document in this lineage: RFC 4733 — RTP Payload for DTMF Digits, Telephony Tones, and Telephony Signals; RFC 4734 — Definition of Events for Modem, Fax, and Text Telephony Signals
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This memo describes how to carry dual-tone multifrequency (DTMF) signaling, other tone signals and telephony events in RTP packets. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC2833
- Published
- May 2000
- Authors
- H. Schulzrinne; S. Petrack
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 30
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 3 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
- RFC 2833 (2000)
- RFC 4733 (2006)
- RFC 4734 (2006) ✓
Read the full history of Definition of Events for Modem, Fax, and Text Telephony Signals →
Referenced by
2 later RFCs formally update or obsolete part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 2862RTP Payload Format for Real-Time PointersCurrent
June 2000
- RFC 2762Sampling of the Group Membership in RTPCurrent
February 2000
- RFC 2733An RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error CorrectionObsoleted
December 1999
- RFC 2959Real-Time Transport Protocol Management Information BaseCurrent
October 2000
- RFC 3016RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4 Audio/Visual StreamsObsoleted
November 2000
- RFC 3047RTP Payload Format for ITU-T Recommendation G.722.1Obsoleted
January 2001
- RFC 3119A More Loss-Tolerant RTP Payload Format for MP3 AudioObsoleted
June 2001
- RFC 2508Compressing IP/UDP/RTP Headers for Low-Speed Serial LinksCurrent
February 1999
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?