|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Approved Internet Standard in July 2003. Also known as STD 64.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
Q.DSNSA refers to overall specification of IETF RFC 3550 (July 2003) for fetching RTP for interface protocol.
|
|
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=3550
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 3550 has been in existence since 2003. It obsoletes RFC 1889 (January, 1996). Updated by RFC 5506, RFC 5761, RFC 6051, RFC 6222, RFC 7022, RFC 7164, RFC 7160, RFC 8083, RFC 8108, RFC 8860. Errata Exist.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC is a standards-track document and is currently in the "Proposed Standard" state. 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 3550 defines the base protocol for the transmission of multimedia (voice, video, etc.), over packet networks and, as a successor to RFC 1889, and is widely used.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
Normative References/
[1] IETF RFC 3551 (2003), RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control/
[2] IETF BCP 14, RFC 2119 (1997), Key Words for Use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels/
[3] IETF STD 5, RFC 791 (1981), Internet Protocol/
[4] IETF RFC 1305 (1992), Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Specification, Implementation and Analysis/
[5] IETF RFC 2279 (1998), UTF-8, a Transformation Format of ISO 10646/
[6] IETF STD 13, RFC 1034 (1987), Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities/
[7] IETF STD 13, RFC 1035 (1987), Domain Names - Implementation and Specification/
[8] IETF STD 3, RFC 1123 (1989), Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support/
[9] IETF RFC 2822 (2001), Internet Message Format/
Informative References/
[10] Clark, D. and D. Tennenhouse, "Architectural Considerations for a New Generation of Protocols," in SIGCOMM Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols , (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), pp. 200--208, IEEE Computer Communications Review, Vol. 20(4), September 1990./
[11] Schulzrinne, H., "Issues in designing a transport protocol for audio and video conferences and other multi-participant real-time applications." expired Internet Draft, October 1993./
[12] Comer, D., Internetworking with TCP/IP, vol. 1. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1991./
[13] IETF RFC 3261 (2002), SIP: Session Initiation Protocol/
[14] ITU-T Recommendation H.323 (2003), Visual telephone systems and equipment for local area networks which provide a non-guaranteed quality of service/
[15] IETF RFC 2327 (1998), SDP: Session Description Protocol/
[16] IETF RFC 2326 (1998), Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP/
[17] IETF RFC 1750 (1994), Randomness Recommendations for Security/
[18] Bolot, J.-C., Turletti, T. and I. Wakeman, "Scalable Feedback Control for Multicast Video Distribution in the Internet", in SIGCOMM Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, (London, England), pp. 58--67, ACM, August 1994./
[19] Busse, I., Deffner, B. and H. Schulzrinne, "Dynamic QoS Control of Multimedia Applications Based on RTP", Computer Communications, vol. 19, pp. 49--58, January 1996./
[20] Floyd, S. and V. Jacobson, "The Synchronization of Periodic Routing Messages", in SIGCOMM Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols (D. P. Sidhu, ed.), (San Francisco, California), pp. 33--44, ACM, September 1993. Also in [34]/
[21] IETF RFC 2762 (2000), Sampling of the Group Membership in RTP/
[22] Cadzow, J., Foundations of Digital Signal Processing and Data Analysis, New York, New York: Macmillan, 1987./
[23] IETF RFC 3513 (2003), Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture/
[24] IETF RFC 1918 (1996), Address Allocation for Private Internets/
[25] IETF RFC 1627 (1994), Network 10 Considered Harmful (Some Practices Shouldn't be Codified)/
[26] Feller, W., An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, vol. 1. New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons, third ed., 1968./
[27] IETF RFC 2401 (1998), Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol/
[28] Baugher, M., Blom, R., Carrara, E., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Norrman, K. and D. Oran, "Secure Real-time Transport Protocol", Work in Progress, April 2003./
[29] IETF RFC 1423 (1993), Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part III/
[30] Voydock, V. and S. Kent, "Security Mechanisms in High-Level Network Protocols", ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 15, pp. 135-171, June 1983./
[31] IETF BCP 41, RFC 2914 (2000), Congestion Control Principles/
[32] IETF RFC 1321 (1992), The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm/
[33] Stubblebine, S., "Security Services for Multimedia Conferencing", in 16th National Computer Security Conference, (Baltimore, Maryland), pp. 391--395, September 1993/
[34] Floyd, S. and V. Jacobson, "The Synchronization of Periodic Routing Messages", IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 2, pp. 122--136, April 1994
|
|
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.
|
|
