|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 6381, August 2011
|
|
Title:
|
The 'Codecs' and 'Profiles' Parameters for "Bucket" Media Types. This IETF Standards Track RFC specifies the 'codecs' and 'profiles' MIME media type parameters for use with various MIME type/subtype combinations, enabling unambiguous identification of the codecs used by contained media formats and the profile(s) of the overall container format.
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
pproved and published IETF Standards Track RFC. RFC 6381 was published by the Internet Engineering Task Force in August 2011 as a Standards Track document, Category: Proposed Standard. It obsoletes RFC 4281 and updates RFC 3839, RFC 4337 and RFC 4393.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This Recommendation | International Standard specifies an interoperable format for efficient compression, transmission and storage of biomedical and general waveform signals. In addition to the coded waveform bitstream itself, the draft includes text for identifying an ISOBMFF-family file carrying a bitstream conforming to this Specification using the MIME type application/mp4. The draft also defines sub-parameters for the MIME type codecs parameter, including values derived from sample entry codes such as bgw1, bgwb or bgw2, and additional period-separated elements for signalling profile, constraint and level information.
A reference to IETF RFC 6381 is appropriate because RFC 6381 is the IETF Standards Track specification that defines the codecs and profiles parameters for “bucket” MIME media types, i.e. MIME type/subtype combinations that may contain different media formats. The RFC specifies these parameters so that contained codecs and profile information can be signalled unambiguously from the MIME type context.
The reference is technically necessary for the limited purpose of aligning the MIME/media-type signalling in this Recommendation | International Standard with the established IETF convention for the codecs parameter. Without such a reference, the syntax and interpretation of the codecs parameter used for the ISOBMFF-family file carrying this bitstream could be interpreted as a private convention rather than as an application of the existing IETF media-type parameter framework. Referencing RFC 6381 supports interoperability with systems that use MIME media types and codecs parameter signalling to identify whether media content can be processed.
The use of RFC 6381 is narrow in scope. It does not define the waveform coding bitstream, the syntax elements of the coded waveform data, the parsing process, the decoding process or the encoding process of this Recommendation | International Standard. Its relevance is confined to external media-type signalling for file identification and declaration of codec/profile-related information. This separation preserves the distinction between the normative waveform coding specification and the MIME/media-type signalling conventions used when such content is carried in an ISOBMFF-family file.
Reason incorporation of the full text is inappropriate:
Incorporating the full text of IETF RFC 6381 into this Recommendation | International Standard would be inappropriate because the present document only needs to reference the externally defined codecs and profiles media-type parameter convention. The Recommendation | International Standard does not need to reproduce the full IETF specification, its general discussion of “bucket” media types, its complete generic syntax rules, examples, IANA considerations, security considerations or reference material. The relevant need is simply to rely on the established RFC-defined convention for MIME signalling. [rfc-editor.org]
Full-text incorporation would also obscure the scope of this Recommendation | International Standard. The primary subject of the draft is biomedical and general waveform signal coding, whereas RFC 6381 concerns MIME media-type parameter signalling. Copying the RFC text into the Recommendation would add substantial material that is outside the core waveform coding scope and could create confusion about whether the RFC’s complete media-type framework is part of the waveform bitstream conformance requirements.
In addition, full-text incorporation would create avoidable maintenance and consistency risks. RFC 6381 is an independently published IETF Standards Track RFC; the RFC Editor entry identifies it as an IETF document and the canonical source for the specification. Referencing the RFC allows implementers to consult the authoritative text directly, including the RFC Editor record and associated status information, rather than relying on a duplicated extract embedded in this Recommendation | International Standard.
C
|
|
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=3986
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 6381 is a published IETF Standards Track RFC and represents IETF consensus. It provides a clear and focused specification of the 'codecs' and 'profiles' parameters for use with MIME type/subtype combinations, enabling unambiguous identification of codecs used by contained media formats and profile(s) of the overall container format. The document is publicly and persistently available from the RFC Editor and has been used to update related MIME type registration RFCs.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 6381 is stable and mature. It was published in August 2011 as an IETF Standards Track RFC, with the status Category: Proposed Standard. It obsoletes RFC 4281 and updates RFC 3839, RFC 4337 and RFC 4393, indicating that it replaced and consolidated earlier work on related MIME media type signalling.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 6381 is related to other IETF RFCs concerning MIME media type registration and media type signalling. It obsoletes RFC 4281, which previously defined the 'codecs' parameter, and it updates RFC 3839, RFC 4337 and RFC 4393, which concern MIME type registrations for 3GPP, MPEG-4/MP4 and 3GPP2 multimedia files. In the present Recommendation | International Standard, the relationship is limited to the MIME/media-type signalling context and does not affect the normative definition of the waveform coding bitstream, parsing process, decoding process or encoding process.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
The normative references of RFC 6381 are IETF/RFC-series documents and related Internet standards references. The IETF Datatracker lists the following normative references from RFC 6381: BCP 14 / RFC 2119, RFC 2045, RFC 2231, RFC 2912, RFC 3629, RFC 3839, RFC 4281, RFC 4337, RFC 4393, and STD 63. These references relate to MIME message-body format, MIME parameter encoding, requirement-level terminology, media features, UTF-8, and MIME type registrations for 3GPP, MPEG-4/MP4 and 3GPP2 multimedia files. The relationship of these references to the present Recommendation | International Standard is limited to the MIME/media-type signalling context associated with RFC 6381.
|
|
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):
|
|
|
None
|
