Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop
draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop
Network Working Group S. Proust, Ed.
Internet-Draft Orange
Intended status: Informational April 22, 2016
Expires: October 24, 2016
Additional WebRTC audio codecs for interoperability.
draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop-06
Abstract
To ensure a baseline level of interoperability between WebRTC
endpoints, a minimum set of required codecs is specified. However,
to maximize the possibility to establish the session without the need
for audio transcoding, it is also recommended to include in the offer
other suitable audio codecs that are available to the browser.
This document provides some guidelines on the suitable codecs to be
considered for WebRTC endpoints to address the most relevant
interoperability use cases.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 24, 2016.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Definition and abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Rationale for additional WebRTC codecs . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Additional suitable codecs for WebRTC . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. AMR-WB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.1. AMR-WB General description . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.2. WebRTC relevant use case for AMR-WB . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.3. Guidelines for AMR-WB usage and implementation with
WebRTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. AMR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.1. AMR General description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.2. WebRTC relevant use case for AMR . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.3. Guidelines for AMR usage and implementation with
WebRTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. G.722 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3.1. G.722 General description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3.2. WebRTC relevant use case for G.722 . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3.3. Guidelines for G.722 usage and implementation . . . . 8
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction
As indicated in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview], it has been anticipated
that WebRTC will not remain an isolated island and that some WebRTC
endpoints will need to communicate with devices used in other
existing networks with the help of a gateway. Therefore, in order to
maximize the possibility to establish the session without the need
for audio transcoding, it is recommended in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]
to include in the offer other suitable audio codecs beyond those that
are mandatory to implement. This document provides some guidelines
on the suitable codecs to be considered for WebRTC endpoints to
address the most relevant interoperability use cases.
The codecs considered in this document are recommended to be
supported and included in the Offer only for WebRTC endpoints for
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
which interoperability with other non-WebRTC endpoints and non-WebRTC
based services is relevant as described in Section 4.1.2,
Section 4.2.2, Section 4.3.2. Other use cases may justify offering
other additional codecs to avoid transcoding.
2. Definition and abbreviations
o Legacy networks: In this document, legacy networks encompass the
conversational networks that are already deployed like the PSTN,
the PLMN, the IP/IMS networks offering VoIP services, including
3GPP "4G" Evolved Packet System [TS23.002] supporting voice over
LTE radio access (VoLTE) [IR.92].
o WebRTC endpoint: a WebRTC endpoint can be a WebRTC browser or a
WebRTC non browser (also called "WebRTC device" or "WebRTC native
application") as defined in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview]
o AMR: Adaptive Multi-Rate.
o AMR-WB: Adaptive Multi-Rate WideBand.
o CAT-iq: Cordless Advanced Technology-internet and quality.
o DECT: Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications
o IMS: IP Multimedia Subsystem
o LTE: Long Term Evolution (3GPP "4G" wireless data transmission
standard)
o MOS: Mean Opinion Score, defined in ITU-T P.800 specification
[P.800]
o PSTN: Public Switched Telephone Network
o PLMN: Public Land Mobile Network
o VoLTE: Voice Over LTE
3. Rationale for additional WebRTC codecs
The mandatory implementation of OPUS [RFC6716] in WebRTC endpoints
can guarantee codec interoperability (without transcoding) at state
of the art voice quality (better than narrow band "PSTN" quality)
between WebRTC endpoints. The WebRTC technology is also expected to
be used to communicate with other types of endpoints using other
technologies. It can be used for instance as an access technology to
VoLTE services (Voice over LTE as specified in [IR.92]) or to
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
interoperate with fixed or mobile Circuit Switched or VoIP services
like mobile Circuit Switched voice over 3GPP 2G/3G mobile networks
[TS23.002] or DECT based VoIP telephony [EN300175-1]. Consequently,
a significant number of calls are likely to occur between terminals
supporting WebRTC endpoints and other terminals like mobile handsets,
fixed VoIP terminals and DECT terminals that do not support WebRTC
endpoints nor implement OPUS. As a consequence, these calls are
likely to be either of low narrow band PSTN quality using G.711
[G.711] at both ends or affected by transcoding operations. The
drawback of such transcoding operations are listed below:
o Degraded user experience with respect to voice quality: voice
quality is significantly degraded by transcoding. For instance,
the degradation is around 0.2 to 0.3 MOS for most of transcoding
use cases with AMR-WB codec (Section 4.1) at 12.65 kbit/s and in
the same range for other wideband transcoding cases. It should be
stressed that if G.711 is used as a fall back codec for
interoperation, wideband voice quality will be lost. Such
bandwidth reduction effect down to narrow band clearly degrades
the user perceived quality of service leading to shorter and less
frequent calls. Such a switch to G.711 is less than desirable or
acceptable choice for customers. If transcoding is performed
between OPUS and any other wideband codec, wideband communication
could be maintained but with degraded quality (MOS scores of
transcoding between AMR-WB 12.65 kbit/s and OPUS at 16 kbit/s in
both directions are significantly lower than those of AMR-WB at
12.65 kbit/s or OPUS at 16 kbit/s). Furthermore, in degraded
conditions, the addition of defects, like audio artifacts due to
packet losses, and the audio effects resulting from the cascading
of different packet loss recovery algorithms may result in a
quality below the acceptable limit for the customers.
o Degraded user experience with respect to conversational
interactivity: the degradation of conversational interactivity is
due to the increase of end to end latency for both directions that
is introduced by the transcoding operations. Transcoding requires
full de-packetization for decoding of the media stream (including
mechanisms of de-jitter buffering and packet loss recovery) then
re-encoding, re-packetization and re-sending. The delays produced
by all these operations are additive and may increase the end to
end delay up to 1 second, much beyond the acceptable limit.
o Additional cost in networks: transcoding places important
additional cost on network gateways mainly related to codec
implementation, codecs licenses, deployment, testing and
validation cost. It must be noted that transcoding of wideband to
wideband would require more CPU processing and be more costly than
transcoding between narrowband codecs.
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
4. Additional suitable codecs for WebRTC
The following codecs are considered as relevant codecs with respect
to the general purpose described in Section 3. This list reflects
the current status of WebRTC foreseen use cases. It is not
limitative and opened to further inclusion of other codecs for which
relevant use cases can be identified. These additional codecs are
recommended to be included in the offer in addition to OPUS and G.711
according to the foreseen interoperability cases to be addressed.
4.1. AMR-WB
4.1.1. AMR-WB General description
The Adaptive Multi-Rate WideBand (AMR-WB) is a 3GPP defined speech
codec that is mandatory to implement in any 3GPP terminal that
supports wideband speech communication. It is being used in circuit
switched mobile telephony services and new multimedia telephony
services over IP/IMS. It is specially used for voice over LTE as
specified by GSMA in [IR.92]. More detailed information on AMR-WB
can be found in [IR.36]. References for AMR-WB related
specifications including detailed codec description and source code
are in [TS26.171], [TS26.173], [TS26.190], [TS26.204].
4.1.2. WebRTC relevant use case for AMR-WB
The market of personal voice communication is driven by mobile
terminals. AMR-WB is now very widely implemented in devices and
networks offering "HD Voice" A high number of calls are consequently
likely to occur between WebRTC endpoints and mobile 3GPP terminals
offering AMR-WB. The use of AMR-WB by WebRTC endpoints would
consequently allow transcoding free interoperation with all mobile
3GPP wideband terminals. Besides, WebRTC endpoints running on mobile
terminals (smartphones) may reuse the AMR-WB codec already
implemented on these devices.
4.1.3. Guidelines for AMR-WB usage and implementation with WebRTC
The payload format to be used for AMR-WB is described in [RFC4867]
with bandwidth efficient format and one speech frame encapsulated in
each RTP packet. Further guidelines for implementing and using AMR-
WB and ensuring interoperability with 3GPP mobile services can be
found in [TS26.114]. In order to ensure interoperability with 4G/
VoLTE as specified by GSMA, the more specific IMS profile for voice
derived from [TS26.114] should be considered in [IR.92]. In order to
maximize the possibility of successful call establishment for WebRTC
endpoints offering AMR-WB it is important that the WebRTC endpoints:
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
o Offer AMR in addition to AMR-WB with AMR-WB listed first (AMR-WB
being a wideband codec) as preferred payload type with respect to
other narrow band codecs (AMR, G.711...) and with Bandwidth
Efficient payload format preferred.
o Be capable of operating AMR-WB with any subset of the nine codec
modes and source controlled rate operation. Offer at least one
AMR-WB configuration with parameter settings as defined in
Table 6.1 of [TS26.114]. In order to maximize the
interoperability and quality this offer does not restrict the
codec modes offered. Restrictions in the use of codec modes may
be included in the answer.
4.2. AMR
4.2.1. AMR General description
Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) is a 3GPP defined speech codec that is
mandatory to implement in any 3GPP terminal that supports voice
communication. This includes both mobile phone calls using GSM and
3G cellular systems as well as multimedia telephony services over IP/
IMS and 4G/VoLTE, such as GSMA voice IMS profile for VoLTE in
[IR.92]. In addition to impacts listed above, support of AMR can
avoid degrading the high efficiency over mobile radio access.
References for AMR related specifications including detailed codec
description and source code are in [TS26.071], [TS26.073],
[TS26.090], [TS26.104].
4.2.2. WebRTC relevant use case for AMR
A user of a WebRTC endpoint on a device integrating an AMR module
wants to communicate with another user that can only be reached on a
mobile device that only supports AMR. Although more and more
terminal devices are now "HD voice" and support AMR-WB; there are
still a high number of legacy terminals supporting only AMR
(terminals with no wideband / HD Voice capabilities) that are still
in use. The use of AMR by WebRTC endpoints would consequently allow
transcoding free interoperation with all mobile 3GPP terminals.
Besides, WebRTC endpoints running on mobile terminals (smartphones)
may reuse the AMR codec already implemented on these devices.
4.2.3. Guidelines for AMR usage and implementation with WebRTC
The payload format to be used for AMR is described in [RFC4867] with
bandwidth efficient format and one speech frame encapsulated in each
RTP packet. Further guidelines for implementing and using AMR with
purpose to ensure interoperability with 3GPP mobile services can be
found in [TS26.114]. In order to ensure interoperability with 4G/
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
VoLTE as specified by GSMA, the more specific IMS profile for voice
derived from [TS26.114] should be considered in [IR.92]. In order to
maximize the possibility of successful call establishment for WebRTC
endpoints offering AMR, it is important that the WebRTC endpoints:
o Be capable of operating AMR with any subset of the eight codec
modes and source controlled rate operation.
o Offer at least one configuration with parameter settings as
defined in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2 of [TS26.114]. In order to
maximize the interoperability and quality this offer shall not
restrict AMR codec modes offered. Restrictions in the use of
codec modes may be included in the answer.
4.3. G.722
4.3.1. G.722 General description
G.722 [G.722] is an ITU-T defined wideband speech codec. G.722 was
approved by ITU-T in 1988. It is a royalty free codec that is common
in a wide range of terminals and endpoints supporting wideband speech
and requiring low complexity. The complexity of G.722 is estimated
to 10 MIPS [EN300175-8] which is 2.5 to 3 times lower than AMR-WB.
Especially, G.722 has been chosen by ETSI DECT as the mandatory
wideband codec for New Generation DECT with purpose to greatly
increase the voice quality by extending the bandwidth from narrow
band to wideband. G.722 is the wideband codec required for CAT-iq
DECT certified terminals and the V2.0 of CAT-iq specifications have
been approved by GSMA as minimum requirements for HD voice logo usage
on "fixed" devices; i.e., broadband connections using the G.722
codec.
4.3.2. WebRTC relevant use case for G.722
G.722 is the wideband codec required for DECT CAT-iq terminals. DECT
cordeless phones are still widely used to offer short range wireless
connection to PSTN or VoIP services. G.722 has also been specified
by ETSI in [TS181005] as mandatory wideband codec for IMS multimedia
telephony communication service and supplementary services using
fixed broadband access. The support of G.722 would consequently
allow transcoding free IP interoperation between WebRTC endpoints and
fixed VoIP terminals including DECT / CAT-IQ terminals supporting
G.722. Besides, WebRTC endpoints running on fixed terminals
implementing G.722 may reuse the G.722 codec already implemented on
these devices.
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
4.3.3. Guidelines for G.722 usage and implementation
The payload format to be used for G.722 is defined in [RFC3551] with
each octet of the stream of octets produced by the codec to be octet-
aligned in an RTP packet. The sampling frequency for G.722 is 16 kHz
but the rtp clock rate is set to 8000Hz in SDP to stay backward
compatible with an erroneous definition in the original version of
the RTP A/V profile. Further guidelines for implementing and using
G.722 with purpose to ensure interoperability with multimedia
telephony services over IMS can be found in section 7 of [TS26.114].
Additional information of G.722 implementation in DECT can be found
in [EN300175-8] and full codec description and C source code in
[G.722].
5. Security Considerations
Security considerations for WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing
Requirements can be found in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]. Implementors
making use of the additional codecs considered in this document are
advised to also refer more specifically to the "Security
Considerations" sections of [RFC4867] (for AMR and AMR-WB) and
[RFC3551].
6. IANA Considerations
None.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors of this document are
o Stephane Proust, Orange, stephane.proust@orange.com ,
o Espen Berger, Cisco, espeberg@cisco.com ,
o Bernhard Feiten, Deutsche Telekom, Bernhard.Feiten@telekom.de ,
o Bo Burman, Ericsson, bo.burman@ericsson.com ,
o Kalyani Bogineni, Verizon Wireless,
Kalyani.Bogineni@VerizonWireless.com ,
o Mia Lei, Huawei, lei.miao@huawei.com ,
o Enrico Marocco,Telecom Italia, enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it ,
though only the editor is listed on the front page.
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
The authors would like to thank Magnus Westerlund, Barry Dingle and
Sanjay Mishra who carefully reviewed the document and helped to
improve it.
8. References
8.1. Normative references
[G.722] ITU, "Recommendation ITU-T G.722 (2012): 7 kHz audio-
coding within 64 kbit/s", 2012-09,
<http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.722-201209-I/en>.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]
Valin, J. and C. Bran, "WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing
Requirements", draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-10 (work in
progress), February 2016.
[IR.92] GSMA, "IMS Profile for Voice and SMS V9.0", April 2015,
<http://www.gsma.com/newsroom/all-documents/
ir-92-ims-profile-for-voice-and-sms/>.
[RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3551, July 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3551>.
[RFC4867] Sjoberg, J., Westerlund, M., Lakaniemi, A., and Q. Xie,
"RTP Payload Format and File Storage Format for the
Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) and Adaptive Multi-Rate Wideband
(AMR-WB) Audio Codecs", RFC 4867, DOI 10.17487/RFC4867,
April 2007, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4867>.
[TS26.071]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.071 v13.0.0: Recommendation ITU-T G.722
(2012): "Mandatory Speech Codec speech processing
functions; AMR Speech CODEC; General description".",
2015-12, <http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26071.htm>.
[TS26.073]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.073 v13.0.0: ANSI C code for the
Adaptive Multi Rate (AMR) speech codec", 2015-12,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26073.htm>.
[TS26.090]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.090 v13.0.0: Mandatory Speech Codec
speech processing functions; Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR)
speech codec; Transcoding functions.", 2015-12,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26090.htm>.
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
[TS26.104]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.104 v13.0.0: ANSI C code for the
floating-point Adaptive Multi Rate (AMR) speech codec.",
2015-12, <http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26090.htm>.
[TS26.114]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.114 v13.3.0: IP Multimedia Subsystem
(IMS); Multimedia telephony; Media handling and
interaction", March 2016,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26114.htm>.
[TS26.171]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.171 v13.0.0: Speech codec speech
processing functions; Adaptive Multi-Rate - Wideband (AMR-
WB) speech codec; General description.", 2015-12,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26171.htm>.
[TS26.173]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.173 v13.1.0: ANSI-C code for the
Adaptive Multi-Rate - Wideband (AMR-WB) speech codec.",
2016-03, <http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26173.htm>.
[TS26.190]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.190 v13.0.0: Speech codec speech
processing functions; Adaptive Multi-Rate - Wideband (AMR-
WB) speech codec; Transcoding functions.", 2015-12,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26190.htm>.
[TS26.204]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 26.204 v13.1.0: Speech codec speech
processing functions; Adaptive Multi-Rate - Wideband (AMR-
WB) speech codec; ANSI-C code.", 2016-03,
<http://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/26204.htm>.
8.2. Informative references
[EN300175-1]
ETSI, "ETSI EN 300 175-1, v2.6.1: Digital Enhanced
Cordless Telecommunications (DECT); Common Interface (CI);
Part 1: Overview", 2015, <http://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_en/300100_300199/30017501/02.06.01_60/
en_30017501v020601p.pdf>.
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
[EN300175-8]
ETSI, "ETSI EN 300 175-8, v2.6.1: Digital Enhanced
Cordless Telecommunications (DECT); Common Interface (CI);
Part 8: Speech and audio coding and transmission.", 2015,
<http://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_en/300100_300199/30017508/02.06.01_60/
en_30017508v020601p.pdf>.
[G.711] ITU, "Recommendation ITU-T G.711 (2012): Pulse code
modulation (PCM) of voice frequencies", 1988-11,
<http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.711-198811-I/en>.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview]
Alvestrand, H., "Overview: Real Time Protocols for
Browser-based Applications", draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-15
(work in progress), January 2016.
[IR.36] GSMA, "Adaptive Multirate Wide Band V3.0", September 2014,
<http://www.gsma.com/newsroom/all-documents/
official-document-ir-36-adaptive-multirate-wide-band>.
[P.800] ITU, "ITU-T P.800: Methods for objective and subjective
assessment of quality", 1996-08, <https://www.itu.int/rec/
T-REC-P.800-199608-I/en>.
[RFC6716] Valin, JM., Vos, K., and T. Terriberry, "Definition of the
Opus Audio Codec", RFC 6716, DOI 10.17487/RFC6716,
September 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6716>.
[TS181005]
ETSI, "Telecommunications and Internet converged Services
and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); Service
and Capability Requirements V3.3.1 (2009-12)", 2009,
<http://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_ts/181000_181099/181005/03.03.01_60/
ts_181005v030301p.pdf>.
[TS23.002]
3GPP, "3GPP TS 23.002 v13.5.0: Network architecture",
2016-03, <http://www.3gpp.org/dynareport/23002.htm>.
Author's Address
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft WebRTC audio codecs for interop April 2016
Stephane Proust (editor)
Orange
2, avenue Pierre Marzin
Lannion 22307
France
Email: stephane.proust@orange.com
Proust Expires October 24, 2016 [Page 12]
