draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-02

[フレーム]

Network Working Group JM. Valin
Internet-Draft Mozilla
Intended status: Standards Track C. Bran
Expires: February 03, 2014 Plantronics
 August 02, 2013
 WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements
 draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-02
Abstract
 This document outlines the audio codec and processing requirements
 for WebRTC client application and endpoint devices.
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 February 03, 2014.
Copyright Notice
 Copyright (c) 2013 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
 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
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft WebRTC Audio August 2013
 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 3. Codec Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 4. Audio Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
 5. Acoustic Echo Cancellation (AEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
 6. Legacy VoIP Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
 An integral part of the success and adoption of the Web Real Time
 Communications (WebRTC) will be the voice and video interoperability
 between WebRTC applications. This specification will outline the
 audio processing and codec requirements for WebRTC client
 implementations.
2. Terminology
 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
3. Codec Requirements
 To ensure a baseline level of interoperability between WebRTC
 clients, a minimum set of required codecs are specified below. While
 this section specifies the codecs that will be mandated for all
 WebRTC client implementations, it leaves the question of supporting
 additional codecs to the will of the implementer.
 WebRTC clients are REQUIRED to implement the following audio codecs.
 o Opus [RFC6716], with the payload format specified in [Opus-RTP]
 and any ptime value up to 120 ms
 o G.711 PCMA and PCMU with one channel, a rate of 8000 Hz and a
 ptime of 20 - see section 4.5.14 of [RFC3551]
 o Telephone Event - [RFC4733]
 For all cases where the client is able to process audio at a sampling
 rate higher than 8 kHz, it is RECOMMENDED that Opus be offered before
 PCMA/PCMU. For Opus, all modes MUST be supported on the decoder
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft WebRTC Audio August 2013
 side. The choice of encoder-side modes is left to the implementer.
 Clients MAY use the offer/answer mechanism to signal a preference for
 a particular mode or ptime.
4. Audio Level
 It is desirable to standardize the "on the wire" audio level for
 speech transmission to avoid users having to manually adjust the
 playback and to facilitate mixing in conferencing applications. It
 is also desirable to be consistent with ITU-T recommendations G.169
 and G.115, which recommend an active audio level of -19 dBm0.
 However, unlike G.169 and G.115, the audio for WebRTC is not
 constrained to have a passband specified by G.712 and can in fact be
 sampled at any sampling rate from 8 kHz to 48 kHz and up. For this
 reason, the level SHOULD be normalized by only considering
 frequencies above 300 Hz, regardless of the sampling rate used. The
 level SHOULD also be adapted to avoid clipping, either by lowering
 the gain to a level below -19 dBm0, or through the use of a
 compressor.
 AUTHORS' NOTE: The idea of using the same level as what the ITU-T
 recommends is that it should improve inter-operability while at the
 same time maintaining sufficient dynamic range and reducing the risk
 of clipping. The main drawbacks are that the resulting level is
 about 12 dB lower than typical "commercial music" levels and it
 leaves room for ill-behaved clients to be much louder than a normal
 client. While using music-type levels is not really an option (it
 would require using the same compressor-limitors that studios use),
 it would be possible to have a level slightly higher (e.g. 3 dB)
 than what is recommended above without causing interoperability
 problems.
 Assuming 16-bit PCM with a value of +/-32767, -19 dBm0 corresponds to
 a root mean square (RMS) level of 2600. Only active speech should be
 considered in the RMS calculation. If the client has control over
 the entire audio capture path, as is typically the case for a regular
 phone, then it is RECOMMENDED that the gain be adjusted in such a way
 that active speech have a level of 2600 (-19 dBm0) for an average
 speaker. If the client does not have control over the entire audio
 capture, as is typically the case for a software client, then the
 client SHOULD use automatic gain control (AGC) to dynamically adjust
 the level to 2600 (-19 dBm0) +/- 6 dB. For music or desktop sharing
 applications, the level SHOULD NOT be automatically adjusted and the
 client SHOULD allow the user to set the gain manually.
 The RECOMMENDED filter for normalizing the signal energy is a second-
 order Butterworth filter with a 300 Hz cutoff frequency.
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft WebRTC Audio August 2013
 It is common for the audio output on some devices to be "calibrated"
 for playing back pre-recorded "commercial" music, which is typically
 around 12 dB louder than the level recommended in this section.
 Because of this, clients MAY increase the gain before playback.
5. Acoustic Echo Cancellation (AEC)
 It is plausible that the dominant near to mid-term WebRTC usage model
 will be people using the interactive audio and video capabilities to
 communicate with each other via web browsers running on a notebook
 computer that has built-in microphone and speakers. The notebook-as-
 communication-device paradigm presents challenging echo cancellation
 problems, the specific remedy of which will not be mandated here.
 However, while no specific algorithm or standard will be required by
 WebRTC compatible clients, echo cancellation will improve the user
 experience and should be implemented by the endpoint device.
 WebRTC clients SHOULD include an AEC and if that is not possible, the
 clients SHOULD ensure that the speaker-to-microphone gain is below
 unity at all frequencies to avoid instability when none of the client
 has echo cancellation. For clients that do not control the audio
 capture and playback devices directly, it is RECOMMENDED to support
 echo cancellation between devices running at slight different
 sampling rates, such as when a webcam is used for microphone.
 The client SHOULD allow either the entire AEC or the non-linear
 processing (NLP) to be turned off for applications, such as music,
 that do not behave well with the spectral attenuation methods
 typically used in NLPs. It SHOULD have the ability to detect the
 presence of a headset and disable echo cancellation.
 For some applications where the remote client may not have an echo
 canceller, the local client MAY include a far-end echo canceller, but
 if that is the case, it SHOULD be disabled by default.
6. Legacy VoIP Interoperability
 The codec requirements above will ensure, at a minimum, voice
 interoperability capabilities between WebRTC client applications and
 legacy phone systems.
7. IANA Considerations
 This document makes no request of IANA.
 Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
 RFC.
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft WebRTC Audio August 2013
8. Security Considerations
 The codec requirements have no additional security considerations
 other than those captured in
 [I-D.ekr-security-considerations-for-rtc-web].
9. Acknowledgements
 This draft incorporates ideas and text from various other drafts. In
 particularly we would like to acknowledge, and say thanks for, work
 we incorporated from Harald Alvestrand and Cullen Jennings.
10. Normative References
 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC3551] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
 Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
 July 2003.
 [RFC4733] Schulzrinne, H. and T. Taylor, "RTP Payload for DTMF
 Digits, Telephony Tones, and Telephony Signals", RFC 4733,
 December 2006.
 [RFC6716] Valin, JM., Vos, K., and T. Terriberry, "Definition of the
 Opus Audio Codec", RFC 6716, September 2012.
 [Opus-RTP]
 Spittka, J., Vos, K., and JM. Valin, "RTP Payload Format
 for Opus Codec", August 2013.
 [I-D.ekr-security-considerations-for-rtc-web]
 Rescorla, E.K., "Security Considerations for RTC-Web", May
 2011.
Authors' Addresses
 Jean-Marc Valin
 Mozilla
 650 Castro Street
 Mountain View, CA 94041
 USA
 Email: jmvalin@jmvalin.ca
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft WebRTC Audio August 2013
 Cary Bran
 Plantronics
 345 Encinial Street
 Santa Cruz, CA 95060
 USA
 Phone: +1 206 661-2398
 Email: cary.bran@plantronics.com
Valin & Bran Expires February 03, 2014 [Page 6]

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /