RFC 6284: Port Mapping between Unicast and Multicast RTP Sessions
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document presents a port mapping solution that allows RTP receivers to choose their own ports for an auxiliary unicast session in RTP applications using both unicast and multicast services. The solution provides protection against denial-of-service or packet amplification attacks that could be used to cause one or more RTP packets to be sent to a victim client. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6284
- Published
- June 2011
- Authors
- A. Begen; D. Wing; T. Van Caenegem
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- wit
- Pages
- 30
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7648Port Control Protocol (PCP) Proxy FunctionCurrent
September 2015
- RFC 8045RADIUS Extensions for IP Port Configuration and ReportingCurrent
January 2017
- RFC 3605Real Time Control Protocol (RTCP) attribute in Session Description Protocol (SDP)Current
October 2003
- RFC 3257Stream Control Transmission Protocol Applicability StatementCurrent
April 2002
- RFC 2431RTP Payload Format for BT.656 Video EncodingCurrent
October 1998
- RFC 6679Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) for RTP over UDPUpdated
August 2012
- RFC 6904Encryption of Header Extensions in the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)Current
April 2013
- RFC 7164RTP and Leap SecondsCurrent
March 2014
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?