RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call
"Anders Klemets" <Anders.Klemets@microsoft.com> Sun, 01 January 2006 21:58 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EtBEA-0002Qc-8Q; Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:58:58 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EtBE8-0002Pm-41 for avt@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:58:56 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA17023 for <avt@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Jan 2006 16:57:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail2.microsoft.com ([131.107.3.124]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EtBJ3-0000y7-SS for avt@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:04:03 -0500
Received: from mailout2.microsoft.com ([157.54.1.120]) by mail2.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:58:44 -0800
Received: from red-hub-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.7.71]) by mailout2.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:58:44 -0800
Received: from win-imc-02.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.69.169]) by red-hub-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:58:43 -0800
Received: from WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.12.88]) by win-imc-02.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:58:43 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call
Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 13:58:43 -0800
Message-ID: <9ED672B9D1A64C489291BE0FB822217D0DB5F72D@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Thread-Topic: [AVT] VC1 payload last call
thread-index: AcYGdWoxn/ud894HS5CnpWxHm93g1wIc/lCQAAk7IFA=
From: Anders Klemets <Anders.Klemets@microsoft.com>
To: miska.hannuksela@nokia.com, avt@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jan 2006 21:58:43.0637 (UTC) FILETIME=[88461E50:01C60F1E]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4b800b1eab964a31702fa68f1ff0e955
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc:
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: avt-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-bounces@ietf.org
Miska, > What is the guideline for the relation of AU payloads and field pictures > - one field picture per AU payload or both field pictures of an > interlaced frame in an AU payload? Please clarify. For interlaced video, a video frame can be coded as two fields. In that case, a VC-1 frame contains a picture header followed by a field header for the first field picture, data for the first field picture (slices, macroblocks, etc.), and then the field header for the second field picture, followed by data for the second field picture. The important thing to note is that the two fields are part of the same frame. Since I have written in the Internet-Draft there is one frame per AU, I think that should already answer your question. The two fields will be in the same AU payload, unless the frame is so big that it needs to be fragmented into multiple RTP packets. I would prefer to not complicate the Internet-Draft with detailed discussions about interlaced video. But I suppose I could add a simple clarifying sentence, like this: "Note that in the case of interlaced video, the VC-1 frame consists of two fields that may be coded as separate pictures. The two pictures still belong to the same VC-1 frame." > In case of field > pictures/frames, please clarify which headers are allowed in an AU > payload. If I add the proposed sentence above, I think it clarifies the relation between fields and frames, without the need to explain that there is one picture header and two field headers. Do you agree? > How is the presentation time of an interlaced frame defined? Please > clarify. The Internet-Draft says that the presentation time of a video frame differs from the sampling instant of the video frame only by an arbitrary constant offset. So, this means that if the frame consists of two fields, the presentation time of the frame is the sampling instant of the field that will be presented first (i.e., the field that was sampled first). I don't think that there is any ambiguity in the Internet-Draft about this. But I don't mind adding a clarifying sentence along the lines of the paragraph above. > I suppose the Buffer Fullness (BF) > syntax element of the picture header could be used for this purpose. > Could you add some sentences in section 3.3 (e.g. an informative note) > to clarify this issue. For example, add a new paragraph to the end of > section 3.3: > > Informative note: The initial buffer fullness for an I-picture in the > Simple and Main Profile is signaled with the Buffer Fullness (BF) syntax > element that is present in the I picture header. You are right, SMPTE 421M defines a BF syntax element for Simple and Main profiles, which specifies the initial buffer fullness. It doesn't affect the correctness of the RTP payload format specification itself, but it might be nice to mention BF anyway, for completeness. This comment shows that you have been reading SMPTE 421M carefully. That's great. :-) Anders _______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
- [AVT] VC1 payload last call Stephan Wenger
- RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call Anders Klemets
- Re: [AVT] VC1 payload last call Colin Perkins
- RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call miska.hannuksela
- RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call Anders Klemets
- RE: [AVT] VC1 payload last call miska.hannuksela
- Re: [AVT] VC1 payload last call Colin Perkins