March 2001 - sg16-avd - lists.packetizer.com

A problem involving sending fast-start element in a facility message.
by pmreddy＠HSS.HNS.COM 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

Hi, I'm stuck with a particular problem, in the implementation of fast-start in the h323v2 implementation. The following are the details. If anybody is certain about the solution please do respond. Consider the scenario in which both calling end-point(A) and called end-point(B) support and prefer fast-start. Calls are gk-routed. A sends Setup message containing a fast-start element, to the Gatekeeper, which fowards it to B. Gatekeeper sends Call-Proceeding to A. B responds to the Setup sent by A, with a Call-Proceeding containing a fast-start element. Now, the Gatekeeper maps the fast-start element to a faststart element in the facility message. NOW, WHAT REASON SHOULD THE FACILITY MESSAGE HAVE?? I feel it should be "forwarded elements". But I am not very sure. If anybody knows about this, please respond immediately. Thanks Praneeth ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Subscription Request
by pmreddy＠HSS.HNS.COM 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Re: FW: [VoIP-list] FW: [Fwd: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and pr ofil e]
by Francois Audet 14 Mar '01

14 Mar '01

Guys, This payload type = 4 for G.723.1 has been in H.225.0 for many years. Don't we have many interoperable H.323 products using PT=4 for G.723? Won't it be a major interoperability problem if this payload type is removed from the A/V specification????? > -----Original Message----- > From: Simao Campos-Neto [ mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM <mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM> > < mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM <mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM> > ] > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 8:27 AM > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM > Subject: [Fwd: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and profile] > > > Dear colleagues, > > please see in the attached that audio payload formats for G.723.1, > called there "G723", has been removed from the latest RTP A/V profile > because of the lack on information that interoperable implementations of > them exist. Other audio payload formats have also been removed, e.g. > H263 (this is not the same as H263-2000), GSM-HR, GSM-EFR, If you know > of such implementations, there is still some VERY short time (less than > 2 weeks) before the IETF issues the repeat WG last call. Please provide > any such information directly to Stephen Casner <casner(a)acm.org>. > > Best regards, > Simao.

3 2

Re: FW: [VoIP-list] FW: [Fwd: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and pr ofil e]
by Francois Audet 14 Mar '01

14 Mar '01

I think that they just need people sending them emails saying "Company X demonstrated G.723.1 interoperability with Company Y". Some people have started to send those to Stephen Casner [casner(a)acm.org] He's looking for people who implemented the early version of H.263-1996 and GSM-HR and GSM-EFR. If you do, respond, because they will remove the payload type... -----Original Message----- From: Rex Coldren [mailto:coldrenr@agcs.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 11:37 AM To: Audet, Francois [SC2:4K02:EXCH] Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: FW: [VoIP-list] FW: [Fwd: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and profil e] Francois, I believe you are correct. However, I am not familiar with how the IETF determines "interoperable implementations". Is is simply a matter of vendors reporting with whom they interoperate or is there some IETF-sponsored interop event that needs to be attended? Rex Francois Audet wrote: Guys,This payload type = 4 for G.723.1 has been in H.225.0 for many years. Don't we have many interoperable H.323 products using PT=4 for G.723?Won't it be a major interoperability problem if this payload type is removed from the A/V specification?????> -----Original Message----- > From: Simao Campos-Neto [ mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM <mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM> > < mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM <mailto:simao.campos@LABS.COMSAT.COM> > ] > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 8:27 AM > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM > Subject: [Fwd: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and profile] > > > Dear colleagues, > > please see in the attached that audio payload formats for G.723.1, > called there "G723", has been removed from the latest RTP A/V profile > because of the lack on information that interoperable implementations of > them exist. Other audio payload formats have also been removed, e.g. > H263 (this is not the same as H263-2000), GSM-HR, GSM-EFR, If you know > of such implementations, there is still some VERY short time (less than > 2 weeks) before the IETF issues the repeat WG last call. Please provide > any such information directly to Stephen Casner <casner(a)acm.org>. > > Best regards, > Simao.

1 0

Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft
by Chip Sharp 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Thanks. I assume since the actual work group mail list is the one given below, that the safest place to send comments (so they will be taken into account in the last call) is to this mail list. :-) Chip At 12:30 PM 3/13/2001 -0500, Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO wrote: >Hi, Chip and All: > >The comments can also be sent to the following email listing: > >sip-h323(a)yahoogroups.com > >This is the actual work group mailing list where most of the discussion is >being taken place for the SIP-H.323 Interworking. > >Best regards, >Radhika R. Roy > >-----Original Message----- >From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO >Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 12:26 PM >To: 'Chip Sharp' >Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM >Subject: RE: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft > > >Hi, Chip and All: > >Any mailing list will be fine. > >However, I would prefer to send the comments in the SG16 mailing list >because although the respective WG Chairs in the IETF are planning to send >the notice in their mailing lists to receive comments soon (I am yet to know >exactly when they will notify it). > >Best regards, >Radhika R. Roy > >-----Original Message----- >From: Chip Sharp [mailto:chsharp@cisco.com] >Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 11:47 AM >To: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO >Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM >Subject: Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft > > >Roy, >Thanks for the notice. > >To which mail list should comments be sent (SG16, sip, iptel, megaco or >spirit)? > >Thanks, >Chip > >At 10:57 AM 3/13/2001 -0500, Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO wrote: > >Hi, Everyone: > > > >We are pleased to let you know that the last call for the following draft > >has been requested in the SIP, IPTEL, MEGACO and SPIRIT WG: > > > >http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking- >r > >eqs-02.txt > > > >Authors: Hemant Agrawal, Radhika R. Roy, Vipin Palawat, Alan Johnston, > >Charles Agboh, David Wang, Kundan Singh, and Henning Schulzrinne > > > >Abstract: This document describes the requirements for the logical entity > >known as the SIP-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will >allow > >the interworking between the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and H.323 > >protocols. > > > >Our objective is to obtain an informational RFC number for this draft. > > > >So, it is, therefore, requested to provide your comments by March 27, 2001. > > > >Best regards, > > > >Radhika R. Roy > > > >AT&T > >Room 3D-2C09 > >200 S. Laurel Avenue > >Middletown, NJ 07748, USA > >Tel: +1 732 420 1580 > >Email: rrroy(a)att.com > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to > >listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com > > >------------------------------------------------------------------- >Chip Sharp Consulting Engineering >Cisco Systems >------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chip Sharp Consulting Engineering Cisco Systems ------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft
by Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Hi, Chip and All: The comments can also be sent to the following email listing: sip-h323(a)yahoogroups.com This is the actual work group mailing list where most of the discussion is being taken place for the SIP-H.323 Interworking. Best regards, Radhika R. Roy -----Original Message----- From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 12:26 PM To: 'Chip Sharp' Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Subject: RE: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft Hi, Chip and All: Any mailing list will be fine. However, I would prefer to send the comments in the SG16 mailing list because although the respective WG Chairs in the IETF are planning to send the notice in their mailing lists to receive comments soon (I am yet to know exactly when they will notify it). Best regards, Radhika R. Roy -----Original Message----- From: Chip Sharp [mailto:chsharp@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 11:47 AM To: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft Roy, Thanks for the notice. To which mail list should comments be sent (SG16, sip, iptel, megaco or spirit)? Thanks, Chip At 10:57 AM 3/13/2001 -0500, Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO wrote: >Hi, Everyone: > >We are pleased to let you know that the last call for the following draft >has been requested in the SIP, IPTEL, MEGACO and SPIRIT WG: > >http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking- r >eqs-02.txt > >Authors: Hemant Agrawal, Radhika R. Roy, Vipin Palawat, Alan Johnston, >Charles Agboh, David Wang, Kundan Singh, and Henning Schulzrinne > >Abstract: This document describes the requirements for the logical entity >known as the SIP-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow >the interworking between the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and H.323 >protocols. > >Our objective is to obtain an informational RFC number for this draft. > >So, it is, therefore, requested to provide your comments by March 27, 2001. > >Best regards, > >Radhika R. Roy > >AT&T >Room 3D-2C09 >200 S. Laurel Avenue >Middletown, NJ 07748, USA >Tel: +1 732 420 1580 >Email: rrroy(a)att.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to >listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chip Sharp Consulting Engineering Cisco Systems ------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft
by Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Hi, Chip and All: Any mailing list will be fine. However, I would prefer to send the comments in the SG16 mailing list because although the respective WG Chairs in the IETF are planning to send the notice in their mailing lists to receive comments soon (I am yet to know exactly when they will notify it). Best regards, Radhika R. Roy -----Original Message----- From: Chip Sharp [mailto:chsharp@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 11:47 AM To: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO Cc: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft Roy, Thanks for the notice. To which mail list should comments be sent (SG16, sip, iptel, megaco or spirit)? Thanks, Chip At 10:57 AM 3/13/2001 -0500, Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO wrote: >Hi, Everyone: > >We are pleased to let you know that the last call for the following draft >has been requested in the SIP, IPTEL, MEGACO and SPIRIT WG: > >http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking- r >eqs-02.txt > >Authors: Hemant Agrawal, Radhika R. Roy, Vipin Palawat, Alan Johnston, >Charles Agboh, David Wang, Kundan Singh, and Henning Schulzrinne > >Abstract: This document describes the requirements for the logical entity >known as the SIP-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow >the interworking between the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and H.323 >protocols. > >Our objective is to obtain an informational RFC number for this draft. > >So, it is, therefore, requested to provide your comments by March 27, 2001. > >Best regards, > >Radhika R. Roy > >AT&T >Room 3D-2C09 >200 S. Laurel Avenue >Middletown, NJ 07748, USA >Tel: +1 732 420 1580 >Email: rrroy(a)att.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to >listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chip Sharp Consulting Engineering Cisco Systems ------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Re: Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft
by Chip Sharp 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Roy, Thanks for the notice. To which mail list should comments be sent (SG16, sip, iptel, megaco or spirit)? Thanks, Chip At 10:57 AM 3/13/2001 -0500, Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO wrote: >Hi, Everyone: > >We are pleased to let you know that the last call for the following draft >has been requested in the SIP, IPTEL, MEGACO and SPIRIT WG: > >http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking-r >eqs-02.txt > >Authors: Hemant Agrawal, Radhika R. Roy, Vipin Palawat, Alan Johnston, >Charles Agboh, David Wang, Kundan Singh, and Henning Schulzrinne > >Abstract: This document describes the requirements for the logical entity >known as the SIP-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow >the interworking between the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and H.323 >protocols. > >Our objective is to obtain an informational RFC number for this draft. > >So, it is, therefore, requested to provide your comments by March 27, 2001. > >Best regards, > >Radhika R. Roy > >AT&T >Room 3D-2C09 >200 S. Laurel Avenue >Middletown, NJ 07748, USA >Tel: +1 732 420 1580 >Email: rrroy(a)att.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to >listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chip Sharp Consulting Engineering Cisco Systems ------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Last Call for the SIP-H.323 Interworking Requirements draft
by Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Hi, Everyone: We are pleased to let you know that the last call for the following draft has been requested in the SIP, IPTEL, MEGACO and SPIRIT WG: http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking-r eqs-02.txt Authors: Hemant Agrawal, Radhika R. Roy, Vipin Palawat, Alan Johnston, Charles Agboh, David Wang, Kundan Singh, and Henning Schulzrinne Abstract: This document describes the requirements for the logical entity known as the SIP-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow the interworking between the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and H.323 protocols. Our objective is to obtain an informational RFC number for this draft. So, it is, therefore, requested to provide your comments by March 27, 2001. Best regards, Radhika R. Roy AT&T Room 3D-2C09 200 S. Laurel Avenue Middletown, NJ 07748, USA Tel: +1 732 420 1580 Email: rrroy(a)att.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

liaison from SG9
by Glen Freundlich 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

Dear Colleagues, Attached is a liaison from SG9 related to trunking gateway protocols. I would have preferred to discus this during last week's meeting, but had problems getting email on the last day of the meeting. If you have any comments, please post them to this mail list. I will draft a liaison reply to send by the end of this week. Best Regards, Glen

1 0