RFC 5104: Codec Control Messages in the RTP Audio-Visual Profile with Feedback (AVPF)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document specifies a few extensions to the messages defined in the Audio-Visual Profile with Feedback (AVPF). They are helpful primarily in conversational multimedia scenarios where centralized multipoint functionalities are in use. However, some are also usable in smaller multicast environments and point-to-point calls. The extensions discussed are messages related to the ITU-T Rec. H.271 Video Back Channel, Full Intra Request, Temporary Maximum Media Stream Bit Rate, and Temporal-Spatial Trade-off. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5104
- Published
- February 2008
- Authors
- S. Wenger; U. Chandra; M. Westerlund; B. Burman
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 64
- Also known as
- —
Topics
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 5219A More Loss-Tolerant RTP Payload Format for MP3 AudioCurrent
February 2008
- RFC 3119A More Loss-Tolerant RTP Payload Format for MP3 AudioObsoleted
June 2001
- RFC 2733An RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error CorrectionObsoleted
December 1999
- RFC 2738Corrections to "A Syntax for Describing Media Feature Sets"Current
December 1999
- RFC 5105ENUM Validation Token Format DefinitionCurrent
December 2007
- RFC 5109RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error CorrectionCurrent
December 2007
- RFC 5117RTP TopologiesObsoleted
January 2008
- RFC 5118Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Torture Test Messages for Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)Current
February 2008
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?