RFC 6381: The 'Codecs' and 'Profiles' Parameters for "Bucket" Media Types
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Several MIME type/subtype combinations exist that can contain different media formats. A receiving agent thus needs to examine the details of such media content to determine if the specific elements can be rendered given an available set of codecs. Especially when the end system has limited resources, or the connection to the end system has limited bandwidth, it is helpful to know from the Content- Type alone if the content can be rendered. This document specifies two parameters, 'codecs' and 'profiles', that are used with various MIME types or type/subtype combinations to allow for unambiguous specification of the codecs employed by the media formats contained within, or the profile(s) of the overall container format. This document obsoletes RFC 4281; RFC 4281 defines the 'codecs' parameter, which this document retains in a backwards compatible manner with minor clarifications; the 'profiles' parameter is added by this document. By labeling content with the specific codecs indicated to render the contained media, receiving systems can determine if the codecs are supported by the end system, and if not, can take appropriate action (such as rejecting the content, sending notification of the situation, transcoding the content to a supported type, fetching and installing the required codecs, further inspection to determine if it will be sufficient to support a subset of the indicated codecs, etc.). Similarly, the profiles can provide an overall indication, to the receiver, of the specifications with which the content complies. This is an indication of the compatibility of the container format and its contents to some specification. The receiver may be able to work out the extent to which it can handle and render the content by examining to see which of the declared profiles it supports, and what they mean. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6381
- Published
- August 2011
- Authors
- R. Gellens; D. Singer; P. Frojdh
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 19
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 4281
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6416RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4 Audio/Visual StreamsCurrent
October 2011
- RFC 6849An Extension to the Session Description Protocol (SDP) and Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) for Media LoopbackCurrent
February 2013
- RFC 5616Streaming Internet Messaging AttachmentsCurrent
August 2009
- RFC 5334Ogg Media TypesUpdated
September 2008
- RFC 7875Additional WebRTC Audio Codecs for InteroperabilityCurrent
May 2016
- RFC 4103RTP Payload for Text ConversationUpdated
June 2005
- RFC 8866SDP: Session Description ProtocolCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 3551RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal ControlUpdated
July 2003
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?