- sg16-avd - lists.packetizer.com

Re: sourceInfo in LRQ
by Francois Audet 14 Jun '01

14 Jun '01

Agreed. I want to make sure that the case where a Gatekepeer is using the endpoint's address because it is proxying its request. Like this: EP1(+1 408 565 5675) GK1 GK2 EP2(+1 408 495 3756) ARQ(Public.local=4953756) sourceInfo(h323-ID=EP1) ------------------------------> LRQ(Public.local=4953756) sourceInfo(h323-ID=EP1) --------------------------> In this example GK1 doesn't know how to resolve 4953756. It asks GK2 to help. It provides the sourceInfo of EP1 (e.g., an h323-ID or the phone number of the originator). GK2 uses the h323-ID to "figure out" the country code and area code that should be used for the Called party (if EP1 dials a local number, then it is the same country code as EP1's). Of course GK1 can do whatever it pleases since it might be using LRQs for its own purposes, not prompted by an ARQ. -----Original Message----- From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej@packetizer.com] Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 10:15 AM To: Audet, Francois [SC2:4K02:EXCH]; ITU-SG16 Subject: Re: sourceInfo in LRQ Francois, I agree with you that what we should do is modify the text to be a bit more tolerant of what "source" means. It might be the source Gatekeeper or it might be the source endpoint's alias. It is possible to find either there today (since either an endpoint or a Gatekeeper may source an LRQ), so the text should reflect that. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: Francois Audet <mailto:audet@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM <mailto:ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:40 PM Subject: sourceInfo in LRQ Hi all, The sourceInfor in LRQ states that it should be the alias address of the originator of the LRQ (as opposed to the originator of the call). One of the consequence of this is that if an endpoint sends an ARQ to its gatekeeper, and its gatekeeper can not resolve it, the LRQ that it will send to other gatekeepers may not have enough information to resolve the address. For example, if the number was a "local" number or a "national" number, the gatekeeper that receives the LRQ will not have enough context (where is the originator of the call) to resolve the address (like the country code of the calling user to figure out the contry code of the called user). Anybody has any views on this? My take is that the LRQ.sourceInfo should really reflect the alias address of the originator of the call (the initial ARQ) as opposed to the gatekeeper that originated the LRQ. An alternative would be to define a new field, but I'm not too keen on this approach since it won't work until H.323v5... ---- François AUDET, Nortel Networks mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com <mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com> , tel:+1 408 495 3756

1 0

sourceInfo in LRQ
by Francois Audet 14 Jun '01

14 Jun '01

Hi all, The sourceInfor in LRQ states that it should be the alias address of the originator of the LRQ (as opposed to the originator of the call). One of the consequence of this is that if an endpoint sends an ARQ to its gatekeeper, and its gatekeeper can not resolve it, the LRQ that it will send to other gatekeepers may not have enough information to resolve the address. For example, if the number was a "local" number or a "national" number, the gatekeeper that receives the LRQ will not have enough context (where is the originator of the call) to resolve the address (like the country code of the calling user to figure out the contry code of the called user). Anybody has any views on this? My take is that the LRQ.sourceInfo should really reflect the alias address of the originator of the call (the initial ARQ) as opposed to the gatekeeper that originated the LRQ. An alternative would be to define a new field, but I'm not too keen on this approach since it won't work until H.323v5... ---- François AUDET, Nortel Networks mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com <mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com> , tel:+1 408 495 3756

2 1

Query Regarding H.235 BES
by ivarghis＠HSS.HNS.COM 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

Hi I have a doubt regarding using BES (Radius ) in H.235 . The H235v2 has mention that in Radius default mode operation the encryption algorithms which are used is DES-CBC or 3DES-Outer CBC. But since the standard has not mentioned any way in which the keys (one key for DES-CBC and 3 keys for 3DES-OCBC ) should be generated, wouldnt it create an interoperability problem as different vendors will use different techniques for generating the keys. Note : In the case of of Baseline Security Profile the key is generated as follows shared key = sha1(password) Is there any endpoint which has implemented the H.235 BES support. If so can you send me some info regarding that. Thanks and Best Regards Ivan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

H.225.0 Annex G and Mobility
by Douglas Clowes 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

Annex G was in part based on the BEST protocol (APC-1480b, APC-1481 Torino Nov-98). That protocol was architected for a mobile-user application, although it is not depicted in the use cases included in APC-1480b. Much of what was in BEST was carried over into Annex G, but some parts were omitted, and other modified. If people are considering using Annex G for mobility, I would recommend a re-read of those documents (which are still available on the ftp site) ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/till_0012/9811_Tor/APC-1480b.zip and ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/till_0012/9811_Tor/APC-1481.zip Regards, Douglas Clowes Savant Solutions ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Introducing new ASN.1 notation for imported elements in H.323 - Some ideas
by Frank Derks 12 Jun '01

12 Jun '01

H.323 imports ASN.1 constructs from H.248. If I am correct, these elements must be encoded as OCTET STRINGS. However, specifying elements in these way does not make it clear what is supposed to go in the OCTET STRING, unless this is added as a comment in the ASN.1 or as explanatory text somewhere else in the document. Recently, I was introduced to the TYPE-IDENTIFIER notation and it would seem that its "&Type part" could help to make the ASN.1 a bit clearer. E.g. the StimulusControl structure currently looks like: StimulusControl ::= SEQUENCE { nonStandard NonStandardParameter OPTIONAL, isText NULL OPTIONAL, h248Message OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } According to the text in Annex L/H.323, the h248Message element may contain any H.248 command. Assuming that this refers to the "Command" element from the H.248 ASN.1, the above can be re- written as: StimulusControl ::= SEQUENCE { nonStandard NonStandardParameter OPTIONAL, isText NULL OPTIONAL, h248Message TYPE-IDENTIFIER.&Type(Command) } This makes it clear that what goes in the h248 message, is a (h.248) command. The same can be applied to the following definitions: H248PackagesDescriptor ::= PackagesDescriptor H248SignalsDescriptor ::= SignalsDescriptor I.e. H248PackagesDescriptor ::= TYPE-IDENTIFIER.&Type(PackagesDescriptor) H248SignalsDescriptor ::= TYPE-IDENTIFIER.&Type(SignalsDescriptor) Any ideas? Regards, Frank ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

CSRC Usage
by Leano, Bob 11 Jun '01

11 Jun '01

Hello: I need some clarification on the use of the CSRC field with respect to audio conferencing by the MC/MCU. Is it optional or mandatory? the only entry in any spec that I saw was in h.225.0 where it talked about csrc count, not csrc list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Porto Seguro output documents
by OKUBO Sakae 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

Dear Rapporteurs and Editors, Could you please upload to /incoming or send to me draft Recommendations you produced in Porto Seguro? Since the PictureTel site is unofficial and set up for experts activities, I cannot simply copy ITU's TDs to there. Best regards, OKUBO Sakae ********************************************************* Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-0051 Japan e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp Tel: +81 3 3204 8194 Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 ********************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

WP2 reports of the SG16 Porto Seguro meeting
by OKUBO Sakae 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

Dear SG16 experts, I have placed the WP2 reports of Mr. Tosco, Chairman of WP2, at the following place: http://standard.pictel.com/ftp/avc-site/0105_Por/WP2_Report_010608.zip It comprises the following six documents: Report Docs 6.01.doc -- Index Report Part I 6.01.doc -- Report Part I - General Report Part II 6.01.doc -- Report Part II - Recommendations to AAP and texts for approval Liaison Stat 6.01.doc -- Liaison Statements Meetings Rep 6.01.doc -- Planned Rapporteur Meetings Status Report 6.01.doc -- Status Report for Recommendations of WP2/16 Best regards, OKUBO Sakae ********************************************************* Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-0051 Japan e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp Tel: +81 3 3204 8194 Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 ********************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0

Re: Selecting Codecs with dynamic RTP Payload Type
by Tom-PT Taylor 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

I assume you're talking about Megaco/H.248 with binary encoding. This is an interesting issue -- you may have to an object identifier after the fashion of H.245, or we'll have to extend the range of acodec. I'm passing this one on to the SG 16 list for comment. -----Original Message----- From: Nierhaus, Florian [mailto:Florian.Nierhaus@icn.siemens.com] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 9:49 PM To: 'megaco(a)fore.com' Subject: Selecting Codecs with dynamic RTP Payload Type Hi, I want to add a Termination and select GSM EFR as codec. Can someone tell me what is the correct way to do this? The Payload Type for GSM EFR is dynamic. ACodec seems to only support ITU codecs. Thanks, Florian Nierhaus

1 0

Information on H235V2 End Points
by Babu Varghese 08 Jun '01

08 Jun '01

Hi, I would like to know if there are any H.323 End Points (H235 V2 Complaint - Commerical/ Evaluation copy) available. H235V2 discuss that GateKeeper can make use of Back End Server (BES) support (using Radius) to authenticate messages. It would be very useful (For interoperabilty) if there are end-point available that support BES security profile. If any end-point support BES, it should handle the Radius "challenge" by sending "Challenge Response", which is part of "ClearToken". Some Information on the availabilty endpoints that support Supplementary Services such as Call Transfer, Call Hold and Call Waiting also will be definitely useful. Thanks, Babu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)mailbag.intel.com

1 0