|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Standards Track RFC
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This reference describes how to transport real-time text conversation session contents in RTP packets. Text conversation session contents are specified in ITU-T Recommendation T.140. This RFC updates RFC 2793, which was the basis for the previous version of H.323 Annex G. The new RFC adds clarity and better guidance for implementers, along with a new negotiated parameter to control text transmission rates.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=4103
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Stnadard. This RFC has been in existence since June 2005, obsolescing RFC 2793.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Standard. RFC 4013 was published in June 2005 and largely exists to clarify RFC 2793 and to provide better guidance to implementers. Current standards status of this document can be found at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/std/std1.txt
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 4013 is a basic component of the basic suite of internet protocols and standards and is widely used by the internet community.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] ITU-T Recommendation T.140 (1998) - Text conversation protocol for multimedia application, with amendment 1, (2000)./
[2] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003./
[3] Perkins, C., Kouvelas, I., Hodson, O., Hardman, V., Handley, M., Bolot, J., Vega-Garcia, A., and S. Fosse-Parisis, "RTP Payload for Redundant Audio Data", RFC 2198, September 1997./
[4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
[5] ISO/IEC 10646-1: (1993), Universal Multiple Octet Coded Character Set./
[6] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003./
[7] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998./
[8] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error Correction", RFC 2733, December 1999./
[9] Jones, P., "Registration of the text/red MIME Sub-Type", RFC 4102, June 2005./
[10] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 2002./
[11] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551, July 2003./
[12] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981./
[13] Floyd, S. and J. Kempf, "IAB Concerns Regarding Congestion Control for Voice Traffic in the Internet", RFC 3714, March 2004./
[14] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 711, March 2004./
[15] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Petrack, "RTP Payload for DTMF Digits, Telephony Tones and Telephony Signals", RFC 2833, May 2000./
[16] Hellstrom, G., "RTP Payload for Text Conversation", RFC 2793, May 2000./
[17] ITU-T Recommendation F.703, Multimedia Conversational Services, November 2000.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
References should always be made to RFC numbers (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References not to be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
|
