March 1999 - sg16-avd - lists.packetizer.com

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS (further to Randy Bloomfield's note)
by Eric Hauch 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Chris, Thanks for your note. Firstly I simply used Joon's mailing list (plus some of the T1 folks). I see you did this as well - which is good (keeps everyone informed). Committee T1 is not affiliated with the IETF but various T1 groups work in concert with the IETF on a fairly wide range of issues, this being one of them. For instance, when we first started the MMoIP project, I gave a presentation to the IETF in Memphis to explain what we're doing and why. Various members of T1A1 also participate in the IETF - and the IETF leadership has and is participating in our work. Working Groups are managed by Committee T1 but are not voting bodies. Anyone and everyone is welcome to attend and participate - the same is true for the Ad Hoc groups (which are really just topic-focused subsets of WG's). One of the values of T1 comes at standards setting time - and this is a decided by member votes in keeping with the general requirements for ANSI accreditation. Please understand, my note is not intended to discourage Joon's initiative - but rather to offer the work T1A1 has already done, to leverage our respective memberships and to provide a clear path to getting a standard (reference Joon's 4th charter point). This I'm sure was the spirit of Randy's note as well. Eric >>> Christian Kuhtz <ck(a)ns1.adsu.bellsouth.com> 03/03 4:14 PM >>> Eric, I think the purpose of this group is to discuss and explore ways of providing IP QoS for VoIP networks, and to evaluate applicable existing technology as well as provide feedback for emerging technology. I don't quite understand why we need a managed membership committee to run this -- particularly the managed membership part is what I find troubling. What benefit are you providing? Personally, I find this difficult to define, because you are obviously not the premier forum for IP related issues (the IETF is). Please explain. So, if you're affiliated with the IETF, why don't you participate in our working group rather than we move our IP network related issues into T1? And, was it really neccessary to carbon copy over half a dozen mailing lists on this subject matter? Thanks in advance. Cheers, Chris -- "Kannst du nicht allen gefallen durch deine That und dein Kunstwerk -- mach es wenigen recht, vielen gefallen ist schlimm" -- Schiller [Disclaimer: I speak for myself and my views are my own and not in any way to be construed as the views of BellSouth Corporation. ]

1 0

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS (further to Randy Bloomfield's note)
by Christian Kuhtz 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Eric, I think the purpose of this group is to discuss and explore ways of providing IP QoS for VoIP networks, and to evaluate applicable existing technology as well as provide feedback for emerging technology. I don't quite understand why we need a managed membership committee to run this -- particularly the managed membership part is what I find troubling. What benefit are you providing? Personally, I find this difficult to define, because you are obviously not the premier forum for IP related issues (the IETF is). Please explain. So, if you're affiliated with the IETF, why don't you participate in our working group rather than we move our IP network related issues into T1? And, was it really neccessary to carbon copy over half a dozen mailing lists on this subject matter? Thanks in advance. Cheers, Chris -- "Kannst du nicht allen gefallen durch deine That und dein Kunstwerk -- mach es wenigen recht, vielen gefallen ist schlimm" -- Schiller [Disclaimer: I speak for myself and my views are my own and not in any way to be construed as the views of BellSouth Corporation. ]

1 0

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS
by Scott Bradner 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

I do hope that you-all take a look at what is going on in the IETF before going off to invent a different QoS for IP technology - SG16 doing that sort of thing would seem to be quite counter productive I would suggest that people interested in IP QoS get on the IETF mailing lists (diffserv, RSVP, and intserv - see www.ietf.org under working groups to find out how) Scott ----

1 0

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS (further to Randy Bloomfield's note)
by Eric Hauch 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Joon, My name is Eric Hauch. I am the current Ad Hoc Group leader for a Working Group T1A1.5 activity that appears to closely parallel your initiative. Committee T1 (of which TSC T1A1 is part) is an open standards forum sponsored by the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) and accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). As such, Committee T1 is the ANSI authority in the United States for defining telecommunications interface and performance standards. Committee T1 TSC's are also a key source of research and advice to the US State Department's delegations to the ITU - and have formal liaisons with the IETF. The current Ad Hoc Group work on defining multimedia performance requirements for business quality conferences carried over IP based networks is part of addressing these standards setting responsibilities. We very much share the reasons you state for needing these QoS standards soon. The work of the MMoIP Ad Hoc Group is about 60% complete (i.e. we're just over half way to making a recommendation to send our draft standard to T1 letter ballot). The last Ad Hoc group conference call was Feb 25, 99 - the next, Apr 1, 99. Attendance and participation in any T1 activity is completely open. Voting at the TSC and T1 levels is by membership (for example, VTel is a member of T1A1). You can find out more about TSC T1A1, WG T1A1.5 and the Ad Hoc Group activities (through the posted documentation) at www.t1.org. As past chair of WG T1A1.5, I have enjoyed VTel's excellent past contributions to our efforts and have been very supportive and encouraging of VTel's particpation in this particular Ad Hoc group. To the extent your initiative indicates a renewed interest on your part and others in your industry segment, I am delighted - and encourage and welcome all of you to work with us. I'll look forward to hearing from you, Eric G. Hauch Vice-Chair T1A1 615-532-2365 ehauch(a)mail.state.tn.us >>> "Joon Maeng" <Joon_Maeng(a)vtel.com> 03/03 10:40 AM >>> Greetings! My name is Joon Maeng. I work for VTEL Corp in USA. I've talked to several companies while I was attending ITU and IETF meetings about establishing an ad-hoc group to address QoS (Quality of Service) issues in TRANSPORTING REAL-TIME TRAFFICS in the packet switched network, especially in the IP network. I was very encouraged by responses from those companies. Most of them agreed that lack of QoS support for real-time traffics was one of major barriers in deploying H.323/VoIP products and the H.323 industry would benefit by having a QoS activity group. I would like to ask if your company would be interested in the activities described in the following: Proposed name of the group: H.323/VoIP QoS Activity Group. Motivation: ITU defined a good conference standard, H.323, for the packet network. IETF is actively defining QoS standards for the IP network. The deployment of H.323/VoIP products has been slow partially due to lack of QoS supports in current IP network. The H.323/VoIP industry shall work together to access the issues and provide solutions for the users. Proposed charter of the group: - Assess QoS issues in transporting real-time traffics (calls with long-duration compared to web-access) in the IP network, - Find the solutions to resolve issues, - Execute solutions via various processes such as building consensus on various QoS solutions among participants, submitting recommendations to standardization bodies if needed, and facilitating inter-operablity testing between QoS standards and application standards, - and education, promotion, etc. I would expect the final charter and the structure of the group will be determined by the participants and their interests. I would say that everything is open at this time except that the industry shall look at the QoS issues seriously for real-time traffics. I'd like to clarify that the proposed group is not a group to standardize the QoS. It is a group or a forum that is interested in helping and promoting the real-time QoS for H.323/VoIP industry through various methods (to be determined). I plan to set up an email reflector for the initial discussions among participants and decide the following steps based on the discussions. Please email me (joon_maeng@ vtel.com) if you and your company would be interested in joining the initial talks via email reflector. Your comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Joon

1 0

BT change of representative
by Pete Cordell 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Dear All, As you may know by know, I am moving on to own little venture. In case you were wondering, it doesn't involve H.323!!! This does mean that I will not be representing BT any more in SG16. This role will probably be taken over by Morgan Potter at morgan.potter(a)bt.com, so if you have any questions from BT he is the one to ask. Also Mike should be able to help. I would like to take this opportunity to say that, despite the hard work, I have enjoyed my time working with you and I wish you all the best. And, who knows, perhaps we'll meet again in the future - If you get back to Ipswich sometime on your travels, then look me up (assuming the Rapporteurs give you time to get out the meetings!). Regards, Pete ================================= Pete Cordell BT Labs E-Mail: pete.cordell(a)bt-sys.bt.co.uk Tel: +44 1473 646436 Fax: +44 1473 645499 =================================

1 0

H.323/VoIP QoS
by Joon Maeng 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Greetings! My name is Joon Maeng. I work for VTEL Corp in USA. I've talked to several companies while I was attending ITU and IETF meetings about establishing an ad-hoc group to address QoS (Quality of Service) issues in TRANSPORTING REAL-TIME TRAFFICS in the packet switched network, especially in the IP network. I was very encouraged by responses from those companies. Most of them agreed that lack of QoS support for real-time traffics was one of major barriers in deploying H.323/VoIP products and the H.323 industry would benefit by having a QoS activity group. I would like to ask if your company would be interested in the activities described in the following: Proposed name of the group: H.323/VoIP QoS Activity Group. Motivation: ITU defined a good conference standard, H.323, for the packet network. IETF is actively defining QoS standards for the IP network. The deployment of H.323/VoIP products has been slow partially due to lack of QoS supports in current IP network. The H.323/VoIP industry shall work together to access the issues and provide solutions for the users. Proposed charter of the group: - Assess QoS issues in transporting real-time traffics (calls with long-duration compared to web-access) in the IP network, - Find the solutions to resolve issues, - Execute solutions via various processes such as building consensus on various QoS solutions among participants, submitting recommendations to standardization bodies if needed, and facilitating inter-operablity testing between QoS standards and application standards, - and education, promotion, etc. I would expect the final charter and the structure of the group will be determined by the participants and their interests. I would say that everything is open at this time except that the industry shall look at the QoS issues seriously for real-time traffics. I'd like to clarify that the proposed group is not a group to standardize the QoS. It is a group or a forum that is interested in helping and promoting the real-time QoS for H.323/VoIP industry through various methods (to be determined). I plan to set up an email reflector for the initial discussions among participants and decide the following steps based on the discussions. Please email me (joon_maeng@ vtel.com) if you and your company would be interested in joining the initial talks via email reflector. Your comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Joon

4 3

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS
by Agans, Dave 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Joon, Count Zydacron in. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Joon Maeng [mailto:Joon_Maeng@VTEL.COM] > Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 11:40 AM > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM > Subject: H.323/VoIP QoS > > > Greetings! My name is Joon Maeng. I work for VTEL Corp in > USA. I've talked to > several companies while I was attending ITU and IETF meetings > about establishing > an ad-hoc group to address QoS (Quality of Service) issues in > TRANSPORTING > REAL-TIME TRAFFICS in the packet switched network, especially > in the IP network. > I was very encouraged by responses from those companies. > Most of them agreed > that lack of QoS support for real-time traffics was one of > major barriers in > deploying H.323/VoIP products and the H.323 industry would > benefit by having a > QoS activity group. I would like to ask if your company > would be interested in > the activities described in the following: > > Proposed name of the group: H.323/VoIP QoS Activity Group. > > Motivation: ITU defined a good conference standard, H.323, > for the packet > network. IETF is actively defining QoS standards for the IP > network. The > deployment of H.323/VoIP products has been slow partially due > to lack of QoS > supports in current IP network. The H.323/VoIP industry > shall work together to > access the issues and provide solutions for the users. > > Proposed charter of the group: > - Assess QoS issues in transporting real-time traffics (calls > with long-duration > compared to web-access) in the IP network, > - Find the solutions to resolve issues, > - Execute solutions via various processes such as building > consensus on various > QoS solutions among participants, > submitting recommendations to standardization bodies if needed, and > facilitating inter-operablity testing between QoS standards > and application > standards, > - and education, promotion, etc. > > I would expect the final charter and the structure of the > group will be > determined by the participants and their interests. I > would say that > everything is open at this time except that the industry > shall look at the QoS > issues seriously for real-time traffics. I'd like to clarify > that the proposed > group is not a group to standardize the QoS. It is a group > or a forum that is > interested in helping and promoting the real-time QoS for > H.323/VoIP industry > through various methods (to be determined). I plan to set > up an email > reflector for the initial discussions among participants and > decide the > following steps based on the discussions. Please email me > (joon_maeng@ vtel.com) > if you and your company would be interested in joining the > initial talks via > email reflector. Your comments and suggestions will be > greatly appreciated. > Regards, > Joon >

1 0

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS
by Roy Spitzer 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Joon, Telogy would like to join this effort. Regards, Roy Roy Spitzer Telogy Networks, Inc. Phone: (301) 515-6531 20250 Century Blvd. Fax: (301) 515-7954 Germantown, MD 20874 Email: rspitzer(a)telogy.com -----Original Message----- From: Joon Maeng [mailto:Joon_Maeng@VTEL.COM] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 11:40 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.com Subject: H.323/VoIP QoS Greetings! My name is Joon Maeng. I work for VTEL Corp in USA. I've talked to several companies while I was attending ITU and IETF meetings about establishing an ad-hoc group to address QoS (Quality of Service) issues in TRANSPORTING REAL-TIME TRAFFICS in the packet switched network, especially in the IP network. I was very encouraged by responses from those companies. Most of them agreed that lack of QoS support for real-time traffics was one of major barriers in deploying H.323/VoIP products and the H.323 industry would benefit by having a QoS activity group. I would like to ask if your company would be interested in the activities described in the following: Proposed name of the group: H.323/VoIP QoS Activity Group. Motivation: ITU defined a good conference standard, H.323, for the packet network. IETF is actively defining QoS standards for the IP network. The deployment of H.323/VoIP products has been slow partially due to lack of QoS supports in current IP network. The H.323/VoIP industry shall work together to access the issues and provide solutions for the users. Proposed charter of the group: - Assess QoS issues in transporting real-time traffics (calls with long-duration compared to web-access) in the IP network, - Find the solutions to resolve issues, - Execute solutions via various processes such as building consensus on various QoS solutions among participants, submitting recommendations to standardization bodies if needed, and facilitating inter-operablity testing between QoS standards and application standards, - and education, promotion, etc. I would expect the final charter and the structure of the group will be determined by the participants and their interests. I would say that everything is open at this time except that the industry shall look at the QoS issues seriously for real-time traffics. I'd like to clarify that the proposed group is not a group to standardize the QoS. It is a group or a forum that is interested in helping and promoting the real-time QoS for H.323/VoIP industry through various methods (to be determined). I plan to set up an email reflector for the initial discussions among participants and decide the following steps based on the discussions. Please email me (joon_maeng@ vtel.com) if you and your company would be interested in joining the initial talks via email reflector. Your comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Joon

1 0

AW: H.323 multipoint conference with consultation calls?
by Klaghofer Karl ICN IB NL IP 7 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Hans, To make use of the conference "invite" approach, you always have to have "created" (conference create) a two party conference before. Here is my understanding of the proposal of the TD-26 Monterey how to make use of the conference invite function (H.323 clause 8.4.3) for Conference out of Consultation: Precondition: A has put B on hold (call #1) and consults to C (call #2). Upon conference request by user A while being in consultation, endpoint A has now to send a new SETUP (call #3) with conference "create" to an MCU. Afterwards endpoint A sends a further SETUP (#4) with conference "invite" to the MCU (causing the MCU to call B). Furthermore A has to send another SETUP (#5) to the MCU causing the MCU to call C. Finally you end up having calls between the MCU and the endpoints A, B and C. However, with the current draft H.450.8 approach, the SETUP#3 sent from A to the MCU includes all the information (h450 operation) the MCU needs to complete the conference. If the MCU does not understand this optimized procedure, a fallback to H.225.0 procedures is defined. Your question on adding further users D, E, ...: Once the multipoint conference is in place, draft H.450.8 defines to make use of existing conference "invite" function to add further parties. This proposal was made to re-use existing H.225.0 functions as far as possible at this stage. According to your suggestion, a H.450 operation could be defined very easily (to be sent from a conferee (A, B or C) to the MCU in a FACILITY causing the MCU to call user D). This would especially make sense if the user A decides to add a couple of users (D, E, F and G) to an existing multipoint conference in one step (this is very likely at a PC based H.323 client where the user A may select 4 additional users and clicks the "add to conference" button. It would save 4 SETUPs compared to the current description. Regards, Karl ------------------------------------------------ Karl Klaghofer, Siemens AG, Dpmt. ICN IB NL IP7 Hofmannstr. 51, D-81359 Munich, Germany Tel.: +49 89 722 31488, Fax.: +49 89 722 37629 e-mail: karl.klaghofer(a)vs.siemens.de > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Hans Andersson E (ERA) (by way of Sakae OKUBO) > [SMTP:Hans.E.Andersson@ERA.ERICSSON.SE] > Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 3. März 1999 17:08 > An: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com > Betreff: H.323 multipoint conference with consultation calls? > > Hello! > > I have a question regarding multipoint conferences in H.323. > > In the H.323 standard, it seems as if the "Conference Invite" > functionality > (see 8.4.3.5) requires that calling party (Endpoint 1) already before > making > the call set-up to Endpoint 2 (E2) must have decided that E2 shall be > brought into the conference as a new member. So it is not possible for E1 > to > make an enquiry (consultation) call to see if E2 has the time to > participate, has the required competence or whatever the criterion for > participation might be. > > But, when I look at the Draft new recommendation H.450.8 "Conference out > of > Consultation Supplementary Service for H.323 (SS-CoC)" (February 8, 1999), > it seems to have what I am looking for. > > According to this recommendation, it is possible to make a call, put the > called (or calling of course) party on hold, make a consultation call and > at > that moment (after talking to the E2 party) decide to create a conference. > > But how do I do if I want to expand this to yet another party in the same > way? According to H.450.8 (7.4.1), I shall use the H.323 "conference > invite". > > That would mean that I have to use different principles when I go from a > 2-party to a 3-party call, than when I go from an N-party to an > (N+1)-party > call. Does it have to be like that? I really think that it would be nice > if > the H.450.8 recommendation can be expanded to cover also cases when the > held > call is a conference. Currently, it only covers the case where the held > call > is to to a remote user. > > I would be glad to get your opinion regarding this. > > Best regards > > Hans Andersson > > _____________________________________________________________________ > Hans Andersson > System Design > GSM Systems > Tel: > +46 8 757 22 38 > Ericsson Radio Systems AB Fax: +46 8 > 404 95 30 > F $B3SSH (Batan 6, Kista > Mob: > +46 70 533 91 12 > S-164 80 STOCKHOLM > Hans.E.Andersson(a)era.ericsson.se > > _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: H.323/VoIP QoS
by Peter Tam 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

Joon: Please count me in. Thanks. Regards..... Peter Tam, Nortel Networks Email: ptam(a)nortelnetworks.com -----Original Message----- From: Joon Maeng [SMTP:Joon_Maeng@vtel.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 11:40 AM To: mpls(a)UU.NET; ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com; voip(a)imtc.org; interwkg(a)imtc.org; h323implementors(a)imtc.org; 'T1A1.2 e-mail reflector'; diff-serv-interest(a)BayNetworks.COM; int-serv(a)isi.edu Subject: H.323/VoIP QoS Greetings! My name is Joon Maeng. I work for VTEL Corp in USA. I've talked to several companies while I was attending ITU and IETF meetings about establishing an ad-hoc group to address QoS (Quality of Service) issues in TRANSPORTING REAL-TIME TRAFFICS in the packet switched network, especially in the IP network. I was very encouraged by responses from those companies. Most of them agreed that lack of QoS support for real-time traffics was one of major barriers in deploying H.323/VoIP products and the H.323 industry would benefit by having a QoS activity group. I would like to ask if your company would be interested in the activities described in the following: Proposed name of the group: H.323/VoIP QoS Activity Group. Motivation: ITU defined a good conference standard, H.323, for the packet network. IETF is actively defining QoS standards for the IP network. The deployment of H.323/VoIP products has been slow partially due to lack of QoS supports in current IP network. The H.323/VoIP industry shall work together to access the issues and provide solutions for the users. Proposed charter of the group: - Assess QoS issues in transporting real-time traffics (calls with long-duration compared to web-access) in the IP network, - Find the solutions to resolve issues, - Execute solutions via various processes such as building consensus on various QoS solutions among participants, submitting recommendations to standardization bodies if needed, and facilitating inter-operablity testing between QoS standards and application standards, - and education, promotion, etc. I would expect the final charter and the structure of the group will be determined by the participants and their interests. I would say that everything is open at this time except that the industry shall look at the QoS issues seriously for real-time traffics. I'd like to clarify that the proposed group is not a group to standardize the QoS. It is a group or a forum that is interested in helping and promoting the real-time QoS for H.323/VoIP industry through various methods (to be determined). I plan to set up an email reflector for the initial discussions among participants and decide the following steps based on the discussions. Please email me (joon_maeng@ vtel.com) if you and your company would be interested in joining the initial talks via email reflector. Your comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Joon

1 0