- sg16-avd - lists.packetizer.com

Re: [h323forum] Re: Codec negotiation question
by Denise Shull 18 Dec '02

18 Dec '02

Trying to not 'plug' any company or technology in this arena, however, I am doing a consulting project for a company that schedules the packets - versus prioritizing them. They are in beta mode but their tests reveal a very effective method for delivering video with greatly reduced latency and jitter. It would be useful to be able to have input from this group both on the idea and on their technology specifically. Regards, Denise Denise K. Shull SHULL ADVISORS, LLC Strategic Application of Meeting Technologies 646-498-6403 www.videooverip.biz -----Original Message----- From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej@packetizer.com] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 8:04 PM To: Paul Long; h323forum(a)mail.imtc.org; ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: [h323forum] Re: Codec negotiation question Paul, Do you mean RFC 2508? In any case, Robert's point is indeed valid. This is where having a specialize GW that multiplexes the RTP streams for delivery over the long-haul is something practical. Perhaps we could take that up as a work item with SG16? It would be reasonable to specify how such an Gateway might function in order to trunk a large number of active calls over long distance. Anyone interested in such a work item? Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Long" <plong(a)packetizer.com> To: <h323forum(a)mail.imtc.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 7:49 PM Subject: [h323forum] Re: Codec negotiation question > Robert, > > Excellent point. I hadn't thought of that. I wonder what happened to > cRTP. Anybody know? That would sure help. > > Paul > > > > > On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:53:34 -0500 > > "Paul Long" <plong(a)packetizer.com> wrote: > > > > > I know lots of folks would like a means of expressing exact > > > packetization, but isn't the solution trivial? All you need is a > small > > > FIFO and a few lines of code to re-packetize according to any > internal > > > requirements. Just write incoming frames regardless of size, e.g., > > > 30fpp, to the FIFO, and read whatever size frames you want, e.g., > 80fpp > > > from the FIFO (only read if there are at least X fpp in the FIFO). > > > > DSP hardware is not the only reason for wanting to have the remote > > endpoint send larger packets. We have many clients on long haul > internet > > links (300ms+ ping times), often with a slow tail circuit (ISDN or > even > > modem) and you REALLY want the other end to send more than one G.723.1 > > frame per packet to reduce the significant overhead that there is in > the > > RTP. > > > > > > > > > > It is unfortunate but true that there is no way of expressing a > > > minimum > > > > acceptable number of frames per packet. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > Paul Long wrote: > > > > > Davide, > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing in the standard that requires the acceptance > of an > > > OLC > > > > > or precludes terminating the call for any reason whatsoever so > both > > > EPs > > > > > are technically compliant. > > > > > > > > > > Packetization in TCS and OLC expresses the _maximum_ frames per > > > packet, > > > > > but several vendors don't understand this simple concept and > > > continue > > > > > to produce products that expect an exact packetization. There > is a > > > good > > > > > chance that that is why EP A is rejecting the OLC. It wants the > > > channel > > > > > opened at exactly 80fpp, although there is no way to express > this > > > in > > > > > H.323. IMO, if this is the reason, that product is broken. > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Hi all, > > > > >> > > > > >>I have a question about a codec negotiation. > > > > >>During H.245 negotiation, endpoint A (master) exports g711A-law > > > with > > > > > > > > > > packetization 80, endpoint B (slave) exports g711A-law with > > > > > packetization 30. After that, endpoint A opens a channel with > > > > > packetization = 20 ms. Endpoint B acknoledges the OLC and tries > to > > > open > > > > > a channel with packetization = 30 ms. > > > > > > > > > >>Here Endpoint A rejects the OLC and the call is disengaged. > > > > >> > > > > >>Does anybody can tell me which endpoint dosn't behave according > to > > > > > > > > > > the H323 standard? > > > > > > > > > >>Thank you in advance. > > > > >> > > > > >>Davide > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: cwp@isdn- > comms.co.uk > > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dr Chris Purvis -- Development Manager > > > > ISDN Communications Ltd, The Stable Block, Ronans, Chavey Down > Road > > > > Winkfield Row, Berkshire. RG42 6LY ENGLAND > > > > Phone: +44 1344 899 007 > > > > Fax: +44 1344 899 001 > > > > > > > > > --- > > > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: equival(a)equival.com.au > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > > ---------- > > Robert Jongbloed Equivalence Pty. Ltd. > > Architect Open Phone Abstraction Library (OPAL) & OpenH323 > > Open Source Telecommunication Protocol Libraries > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Quicknet's revolutionary MicroTelco Services offers > > LOW WORLDWIDE RATES ANY TIME OF THE DAY with > > No monthly fees! No monthly minimums! No connection fees! > > US rates as low as 2.9 cents a minute! To see more rates, > > visit www.microtelco.com > > > > > > ****LIVE VIDEO CONFERENCE NOW AVAILABLE***** > > CUseeMe v5.0 software is an affordable easy-to-use software > > application providing live visual communication between friends, > > family and colleagues worldwide. To learn more, visit, > > www.cuseemeworld.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: paulej(a)packetizer.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > --- You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: deniseshull(a)sbcglobal.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-h323forum-30418E(a)mail.imtc.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

4 6

AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003
by Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 18 Dec '02

18 Dec '02

Gary, thanks for the clarification. Few remaining questions: 1) What does the "technical freeze" actually mean? No new technical contributions? Or only corrections on technologies, if any, if e.g. requirements are not fulfilled or editorial, typographical changes? 2) What is the purpose of a consent meeting in March? Will there be a "last call" immediately afterwards? Is the Mai SG Meeting planned to process the expected comments received? Or, the last call would go out only after the May meeting? In that case why the March Meeting? Kind regards, Istvan -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gary Sullivan [mailto:garysull@microsoft.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Dezember 2002 02:17 An: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3; ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: RE: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Istvan et al, The current plan is for JVT to meet in Pattaya with MPEG. WP3 will then either be in Pattaya on or about the 15th of March or soon thereafter elsewhere. The previous plan was drafted under the expectation that we would need to deliver FDIS text in mid-February as an interim editing output on the MPEG side. We now plan to allow more time for editing and final technical double-check, so FDIS text is not needed that soon. Although technical freeze was declared last week, FDIS is not going to happen until March now so that we can have a more mature document. This lessens the schedule pressure on the MPEG side somewhat. We can benefit from that extra time by doing the same thing on the ITU side and aligning text delivery and final technical double-check in both organizations. This will still enable ITU-T decision no later than May, which is what it probably would have been anyway regardless of whether we did consent somwhat earlier. Best Regards, -Gary -----Original Message----- From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 [mailto:istvan.sebestyen@SIEMENS.COM] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 6:46 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 So, how then are the plans concretely? On March 11-15, 2003 there is an MPEG Meeting in Pattaya. So, H.264 goes to FDIS. But: 1) When and where is the JVT Meeting? 2) When and where is the WP3 Meeting? Kind regards, Istvan -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gary Sullivan [mailto:garysull@microsoft.com] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 12:05 An: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3; ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: RE: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Yes, we are planning for WP3 consent for H.264/AVC sometime between March 15 and March 30. This will let us consent a better draft and coordinate better with the ISO/IEC approval process. Best Regards, -Gary S. _____ From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 [mailto:istvan.sebestyen@SIEMENS.COM] Sent: Mon 12/16/2002 2:32 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Mr. Okubo, Thanks. For mid February also a one day WP3 meeting in Geneva was planned to make "consent" for H.264. Has that also gone away? Regards, Istvan Sebestyen -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: OKUBO Sakae [ mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP <mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP> ] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 05:12 An: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: Fwd: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 experts, The conclusion last week in Awajishima, Japan, was that Q.6/WP3 would not meet as a whole next February. So we will meet in San Jose during 11-14 February 2003 according to 2/ below. Mr. Jones will issue the meeting notice very soon. At 16:23 +0900 02/12/07, OKUBO Sakae wrote: >[...] >Rapporteurs have been seeking the best place to hold this meeting. >This is to report the progress. > >1/ As default, we will meet in Geneva to handle video related topics >with Q.6 experts who will meet there for WP3 consent of H.264. > >2/ In case Q.6 and WP3 should not meet at that time depending on the >interim achievements, Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 will meet in the US, San Jose or >Raleigh, thanks to the offer of Cisco. > >3/ Q.6 is now working in Japan and will have a definite answer next >Friday if they meet in Geneva during the mentioned week next >February. So our final decision will be made at that time. Please >stay tuned on this mailinglist. > >4/ For this Rapporteur meeting, Paul Jones acts as meeting organizer, >and myself as document manager. -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

Re: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003
by Gary Sullivan 17 Dec '02

17 Dec '02

Istvan et al, The current plan is for JVT to meet in Pattaya with MPEG. WP3 will then either be in Pattaya on or about the 15th of March or soon thereafter elsewhere. The previous plan was drafted under the expectation that we would need to deliver FDIS text in mid-February as an interim editing output on the MPEG side. We now plan to allow more time for editing and final technical double-check, so FDIS text is not needed that soon. Although technical freeze was declared last week, FDIS is not going to happen until March now so that we can have a more mature document. This lessens the schedule pressure on the MPEG side somewhat. We can benefit from that extra time by doing the same thing on the ITU side and aligning text delivery and final technical double-check in both organizations. This will still enable ITU-T decision no later than May, which is what it probably would have been anyway regardless of whether we did consent somwhat earlier. Best Regards, -Gary -----Original Message----- From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 [mailto:istvan.sebestyen@SIEMENS.COM] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 6:46 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 So, how then are the plans concretely? On March 11-15, 2003 there is an MPEG Meeting in Pattaya. So, H.264 goes to FDIS. But: 1) When and where is the JVT Meeting? 2) When and where is the WP3 Meeting? Kind regards, Istvan -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gary Sullivan [mailto:garysull@microsoft.com] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 12:05 An: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3; ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: RE: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Yes, we are planning for WP3 consent for H.264/AVC sometime between March 15 and March 30. This will let us consent a better draft and coordinate better with the ISO/IEC approval process. Best Regards, -Gary S. _____ From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 [mailto:istvan.sebestyen@SIEMENS.COM] Sent: Mon 12/16/2002 2:32 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Mr. Okubo, Thanks. For mid February also a one day WP3 meeting in Geneva was planned to make "consent" for H.264. Has that also gone away? Regards, Istvan Sebestyen -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: OKUBO Sakae [mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 05:12 An: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: Fwd: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 experts, The conclusion last week in Awajishima, Japan, was that Q.6/WP3 would not meet as a whole next February. So we will meet in San Jose during 11-14 February 2003 according to 2/ below. Mr. Jones will issue the meeting notice very soon. At 16:23 +0900 02/12/07, OKUBO Sakae wrote: >[...] >Rapporteurs have been seeking the best place to hold this meeting. >This is to report the progress. > >1/ As default, we will meet in Geneva to handle video related topics >with Q.6 experts who will meet there for WP3 consent of H.264. > >2/ In case Q.6 and WP3 should not meet at that time depending on the >interim achievements, Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 will meet in the US, San Jose or >Raleigh, thanks to the offer of Cisco. > >3/ Q.6 is now working in Japan and will have a definite answer next >Friday if they meet in Geneva during the mentioned week next >February. So our final decision will be made at that time. Please >stay tuned on this mailinglist. > >4/ For this Rapporteur meeting, Paul Jones acts as meeting organizer, >and myself as document manager. -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

Q. D/16 Meeting In San Jose
by Tom-PT Taylor 17 Dec '02

17 Dec '02

Q. D/16 will meet in San Jose only if there are contributions to the question. If people intend to submit such contributions, I would appreciate notice by January 20. I will make the decision on whether to hold the meeting on that date. Please see TD 42 (WP 2/16) from the meeting in Geneva, 5-15 February 2002, for suggestions on contribution topics. This document is available in the TIES directory at http://ties.itu.int/u/tsg16/sg16/td/Geneva-5-02-2002/wp2/ Tom Taylor taylor(a)nortelnetworks.com Ph. +1 613 736 0961 (ESN 396 1490) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

ITU-T Q.D,F,G,2-5 Rapporteur's Meeting Announcement
by Paul E. Jones 16 Dec '02

16 Dec '02

To Experts of ITU-T SG16 Questions D, F, G, 2, 3, 4 and 5/16 Cc Mr. P-A. Probst, Chairman of SG16 <probst-pa(a)bluewin.ch> Mr. S. Campos-Neto, ITU TSB <simao.campos(a)itu.int> De T Taylor Rapporteur for Q.D/16 <taylor(a)nortelnetworks.com> M Buckley Rapporteur for Q.F/16 <mikebuckley(a)44comms.com> M Euchner Rapporteur for Q.G/16 <Martin.Euchner(a)siemens.com> P Jones Rapporteur for Q.2/16 <paulej(a)packetizer.com> T Anderson Rapporteur for Q.3/16 <tlatla(a)verizon.net> S Okubo Rapporteur for Q.4/16 <okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp> E Horvath Rapporteur for Q.5/16 <ernst.horvath(a)siemens.com> ------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Notice of Joint Rapporteur Meeting in San Jose, California Date: 16 December 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear experts of Questions D, F, G, 2-5/16, The subject meeting of ITU-T SG16 experts will be held in San Jose, California at Cisco Systems. Details of the meeting are contained herein. 1. Date ^^^^^^^ 11 (Tuesday) - 14 (Friday) February 2003 Meeting will start at 9:00 AM on the first day Closing around 18:00 on the final day 2. Venue ^^^^^^^^ Cisco Systems, Inc. Gateway Conference Center Building J 255 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 94134 USA Tel: +1 408 526 4000 3. Topics (tentative) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1) Review of the relevant group activities 2) Q.D/16 Interoperability of Multimedia Systems and Services - Develop roadmap for future activity on interoperability - Progress work on vocabulary - Cooperate in the development of recommendations on systems 3) Q.F/16 Quality of Service and End-to-end Performance in Multimedia Systems - Progress work for: * H.qos.arch * Review Annex N H.323 * Review and issue draft H.mmclass * Review and issue draft H.priority 4) Q.G/16 Security of Multimedia Systems and Services - Progress work on * H.235 Version 3 * H.235 Annex G (SRTP Usage) * H.SETS (Security for Emergency Telecommunications) * H.324 security enhancements & H.235 Annex C - Maintenance of * Revised H.233/H.234 (Circuit-switched A/V security) * H.235 Annex F (Hybrid Security Profile) * H.530 (Mobility Security) - Other items of interest with security impact 5) Q.2/16 Multimedia over packet networks using H.323 systems - Progress work on: * H.323 Annex N (QoS) * H.323 Annex O (I-net protocols) * Annex I/H.323 * H.225.0v5 * H.323v5 * H.460.tppr * Annex A/H.460.1 - Discuss plans for future work 6) Q.3/16 Infrastructure and interoperability for Multimedia over packet networks - Progress work on * H.246AnxCv2 * H.248AnxF * H.248.19 * H.341v2 - Begin work on * MoIP for H.248 * other new work. 7) Q.4/16 Video and data conferencing using Internet-supported services - Produce requirement capture for H.ldap - Produce draft H.ldap - Produce issue list for H.ldap - Describe other service scenarios - Elaborate workplan 8) Q.5/16 Mobility for Multimedia Systems and Services - Progress work for: * H.500 * H.550 * other mobility related topics 9) Interaction with other groups 10) Future work plan 4. Documents ^^^^^^^^^^^^ /// Registration of the document: by 23:59 UTC, 31 January 2003 /// /// Distribution of the document: by 23:59 UTC, 4 February 2003 /// /// Use the ftp site (or e-mail reflector) for distribution /// 1) When you are going to submit a document, please notify Sakae Okubo <okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp>, document manager of this meeting, as soon as possible, by 23:59 UTC, Friday 31 January 2003 at the latest. Document number AVD-nnnn will be allocated. Early indication of your submission plan is welcome and encouraged. Note - Prefix "AVD" comes from Audio, Video and Data. 2) You are advised to include a header as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | | ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector Document AVD-{nnnn}| | Study Group 16 {Version m if relevant}| | Q.D, F, G, 2-5/16 Rapporteur Meeting {Date}| | San Jose, 11-14 February 2003 | | | | SOURCE*: { } | | TITLE : { } | | PURPOSE: {Proposal, Discussion, Information, Report, etc.} | | | | _________________________ | | | | | | | | *Contact: Name, e-mail | ------------------------------------------------------------------ 3) All the contributors are requested to distribute their documents as early as possible, at least 7 calendar days in advance of the meeting (23:59 UTC, Tuesday 4 February 2003 or before) by posting them at either of the following: - Uploading via FTP The FTP area for SG16 documents is presently being moved. The new location will be advised on the e-mail reflector as soon as the transition of ftp site has been completed. - Intel e-mail reflector e-mail address: itu-sg16(a)echo.jf.intel.com Please avoid the use of reflector when your document is voluminous. 4) Input documents can be retrieved from /0302_San directory of the ftp site once Mr. Okubo has an opportunity to put them into place. 5) The document distribution / presentation at the meeting will be all electronic. Participants must bring along a laptop, Ethernet card, and Ethernet cable in order to access the documents. 5. Logistic information ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The meeting will be hosted by Cisco Systems on the San Jose campus. San Jose Cisco campus map: http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/687/Directory/campus.html Directions to Building J from the San Jose Airport: o When exiting the San Jose Airport, make a left onto Route 87 (Guadalupe Parkway). o Go north on Route 87 to N. First Street. o Turn left onto N. First Street. o Take N. First Street approximately 2.4 miles to Tasman Drive. o Take a right on E. Tasman and cross over First Street. o Building J is in a group of buildings on the right just before you get to Vista Montana Ave. o Approximate distance from the San Jose Airport is 4 miles Directions to Building J from the San Francisco Airport: o Take Highway 101 south towards San Jose. o Take the 237 East exit towards Alviso/Milpitas. o Take the Zanker Exit. o Take a right on Zanker. o Take a left on Tasman. o Building J is in a group of buildings on the right just before you get to Vista Montana Ave. o Approximate distance from the San Jose Airport is 35 miles Transportation to and from the meeting facilities is the responsibility of the attendee. However, several area hotels offer a shuttle service to and from the San Jose airport, as well as to and from the Cisco campus. (Please see section 7 below for a partial listing.) Attendees will have access to the Internet via an Ethernet connection. Attendees are requested to bring an Ethernet cable at least 7 meters in length. 802.11b wireless access will not be available. Power outlets will be provided at each seat for use with laptop computers. The power outlets will be standard US connections at 110 volts. Attendees are required to bring any adapters, as necessary. 6. Registration ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ To register your meeting attendance, please send e-mail to Paul E. Jones <paulej(a)packetizer.com>, providing the family name, given name, company name, and e-mail address of person(s) attending. 7. Hotel Room Reservation ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There are no hotels specifically reserved for this meeting, as hotel space in San Jose is usually plentiful. Even so, it is a good idea to reserve your room in advance. For those who wish to have some suggestions, here are a few of the nearby hotels: Beverly Heritage Hotel 1820 Barber Lane Milpitas, CA 95035 http://www.beverlyheritage.com/ Tel: +1 408 943 9080 Crown Plaza 777 Bellew Drive Milpitas, CA 95035 http://www.sixcontinentshotels.com/h/d/CP/hd/sfomp Tel: +1 408 321 9500 Hilton Garden Inn 30 Ranch Drive Milpitas, CA 95035 http://www.hiltongardeninn.com/en/gi/hotels/index.jhtml?ctyhocn=SJCMHGI Tel: +1 408 719 1313 Sheraton San Jose 1801 Barber Lane Milpitas, CA 95035 http://www.starwood.com/sheraton/search/hotel_detail.html?propertyID=670 Tel: +1 408 943 0600 All of the above hotels offer shuttle service to and from the San Jose airport, as well as shuttle service to and from the Cisco campus. Please check with the hotel for specific details and/or to make arrangements for transportation. We are looking forward to meeting with you in San Jose. Sincerely yours, Tom TAYLOR Mike BUCKLEY Martin EUCHNER Paul JONES (meeting manager of this meeting) Terry ANDERSON Sakae OKUBO (document manager of this meeting) Ernst HORVATH ---------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

Re: [h323forum] Re: Codec negotiation question
by Paul E. Jones 16 Dec '02

16 Dec '02

Paul, Do you mean RFC 2508? In any case, Robert's point is indeed valid. This is where having a specialize GW that multiplexes the RTP streams for delivery over the long-haul is something practical. Perhaps we could take that up as a work item with SG16? It would be reasonable to specify how such an Gateway might function in order to trunk a large number of active calls over long distance. Anyone interested in such a work item? Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Long" <plong(a)packetizer.com> To: <h323forum(a)mail.imtc.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 7:49 PM Subject: [h323forum] Re: Codec negotiation question > Robert, > > Excellent point. I hadn't thought of that. I wonder what happened to > cRTP. Anybody know? That would sure help. > > Paul > > > > > On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:53:34 -0500 > > "Paul Long" <plong(a)packetizer.com> wrote: > > > > > I know lots of folks would like a means of expressing exact > > > packetization, but isn't the solution trivial? All you need is a > small > > > FIFO and a few lines of code to re-packetize according to any > internal > > > requirements. Just write incoming frames regardless of size, e.g., > > > 30fpp, to the FIFO, and read whatever size frames you want, e.g., > 80fpp > > > from the FIFO (only read if there are at least X fpp in the FIFO). > > > > DSP hardware is not the only reason for wanting to have the remote > > endpoint send larger packets. We have many clients on long haul > internet > > links (300ms+ ping times), often with a slow tail circuit (ISDN or > even > > modem) and you REALLY want the other end to send more than one G.723.1 > > frame per packet to reduce the significant overhead that there is in > the > > RTP. > > > > > > > > > > It is unfortunate but true that there is no way of expressing a > > > minimum > > > > acceptable number of frames per packet. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > Paul Long wrote: > > > > > Davide, > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing in the standard that requires the acceptance > of an > > > OLC > > > > > or precludes terminating the call for any reason whatsoever so > both > > > EPs > > > > > are technically compliant. > > > > > > > > > > Packetization in TCS and OLC expresses the _maximum_ frames per > > > packet, > > > > > but several vendors don't understand this simple concept and > > > continue > > > > > to produce products that expect an exact packetization. There > is a > > > good > > > > > chance that that is why EP A is rejecting the OLC. It wants the > > > channel > > > > > opened at exactly 80fpp, although there is no way to express > this > > > in > > > > > H.323. IMO, if this is the reason, that product is broken. > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Hi all, > > > > >> > > > > >>I have a question about a codec negotiation. > > > > >>During H.245 negotiation, endpoint A (master) exports g711A-law > > > with > > > > > > > > > > packetization 80, endpoint B (slave) exports g711A-law with > > > > > packetization 30. After that, endpoint A opens a channel with > > > > > packetization = 20 ms. Endpoint B acknoledges the OLC and tries > to > > > open > > > > > a channel with packetization = 30 ms. > > > > > > > > > >>Here Endpoint A rejects the OLC and the call is disengaged. > > > > >> > > > > >>Does anybody can tell me which endpoint dosn't behave according > to > > > > > > > > > > the H323 standard? > > > > > > > > > >>Thank you in advance. > > > > >> > > > > >>Davide > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: cwp@isdn- > comms.co.uk > > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dr Chris Purvis -- Development Manager > > > > ISDN Communications Ltd, The Stable Block, Ronans, Chavey Down > Road > > > > Winkfield Row, Berkshire. RG42 6LY ENGLAND > > > > Phone: +44 1344 899 007 > > > > Fax: +44 1344 899 001 > > > > > > > > > --- > > > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: equival(a)equival.com.au > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > > ---------- > > Robert Jongbloed Equivalence Pty. Ltd. > > Architect Open Phone Abstraction Library (OPAL) & OpenH323 > > Open Source Telecommunication Protocol Libraries > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Quicknet's revolutionary MicroTelco Services offers > > LOW WORLDWIDE RATES ANY TIME OF THE DAY with > > No monthly fees! No monthly minimums! No connection fees! > > US rates as low as 2.9 cents a minute! To see more rates, > > visit www.microtelco.com > > > > > > ****LIVE VIDEO CONFERENCE NOW AVAILABLE***** > > CUseeMe v5.0 software is an affordable easy-to-use software > > application providing live visual communication between friends, > > family and colleagues worldwide. To learn more, visit, > > www.cuseemeworld.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to h323forum as: paulej(a)packetizer.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-h323forum-27407I(a)mail.imtc.org > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003
by Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 16 Dec '02

16 Dec '02

Dear Mr. Okubo, Thanks. For mid February also a one day WP3 meeting in Geneva was planned to make "consent" for H.264. Has that also gone away? Regards, Istvan Sebestyen -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: OKUBO Sakae [mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 05:12 An: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: Fwd: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 experts, The conclusion last week in Awajishima, Japan, was that Q.6/WP3 would not meet as a whole next February. So we will meet in San Jose during 11-14 February 2003 according to 2/ below. Mr. Jones will issue the meeting notice very soon. At 16:23 +0900 02/12/07, OKUBO Sakae wrote: >[...] >Rapporteurs have been seeking the best place to hold this meeting. >This is to report the progress. > >1/ As default, we will meet in Geneva to handle video related topics >with Q.6 experts who will meet there for WP3 consent of H.264. > >2/ In case Q.6 and WP3 should not meet at that time depending on the >interim achievements, Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 will meet in the US, San Jose or >Raleigh, thanks to the offer of Cisco. > >3/ Q.6 is now working in Japan and will have a definite answer next >Friday if they meet in Geneva during the mentioned week next >February. So our final decision will be made at that time. Please >stay tuned on this mailinglist. > >4/ For this Rapporteur meeting, Paul Jones acts as meeting organizer, >and myself as document manager. -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

2 1

AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003
by Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 16 Dec '02

16 Dec '02

So, how then are the plans concretely? On March 11-15, 2003 there is an MPEG Meeting in Pattaya. So, H.264 goes to FDIS. But: 1) When and where is the JVT Meeting? 2) When and where is the WP3 Meeting? Kind regards, Istvan -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gary Sullivan [mailto:garysull@microsoft.com] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 12:05 An: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3; ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: RE: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Yes, we are planning for WP3 consent for H.264/AVC sometime between March 15 and March 30. This will let us consent a better draft and coordinate better with the ISO/IEC approval process. Best Regards, -Gary S. _____ From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 [mailto:istvan.sebestyen@SIEMENS.COM] Sent: Mon 12/16/2002 2:32 AM To: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Subject: AW: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Mr. Okubo, Thanks. For mid February also a one day WP3 meeting in Geneva was planned to make "consent" for H.264. Has that also gone away? Regards, Istvan Sebestyen -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: OKUBO Sakae [ mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP <mailto:okubo@MXZ.MESH.NE.JP> ] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2002 05:12 An: ITU-SG16(a)echo.jf.INTEL.COM Betreff: Fwd: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003 Dear Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 experts, The conclusion last week in Awajishima, Japan, was that Q.6/WP3 would not meet as a whole next February. So we will meet in San Jose during 11-14 February 2003 according to 2/ below. Mr. Jones will issue the meeting notice very soon. At 16:23 +0900 02/12/07, OKUBO Sakae wrote: >[...] >Rapporteurs have been seeking the best place to hold this meeting. >This is to report the progress. > >1/ As default, we will meet in Geneva to handle video related topics >with Q.6 experts who will meet there for WP3 consent of H.264. > >2/ In case Q.6 and WP3 should not meet at that time depending on the >interim achievements, Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 will meet in the US, San Jose or >Raleigh, thanks to the offer of Cisco. > >3/ Q.6 is now working in Japan and will have a definite answer next >Friday if they meet in Geneva during the mentioned week next >February. So our final decision will be made at that time. Please >stay tuned on this mailinglist. > >4/ For this Rapporteur meeting, Paul Jones acts as meeting organizer, >and myself as document manager. -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

Fwd: Rapporteur meeting in February 2003
by OKUBO Sakae 15 Dec '02

15 Dec '02

Dear Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 experts, The conclusion last week in Awajishima, Japan, was that Q.6/WP3 would not meet as a whole next February. So we will meet in San Jose during 11-14 February 2003 according to 2/ below. Mr. Jones will issue the meeting notice very soon. At 16:23 +0900 02/12/07, OKUBO Sakae wrote: >[...] >Rapporteurs have been seeking the best place to hold this meeting. >This is to report the progress. > >1/ As default, we will meet in Geneva to handle video related topics >with Q.6 experts who will meet there for WP3 consent of H.264. > >2/ In case Q.6 and WP3 should not meet at that time depending on the >interim achievements, Q.D,F,G,1-5/16 will meet in the US, San Jose or >Raleigh, thanks to the offer of Cisco. > >3/ Q.6 is now working in Japan and will have a definite answer next >Friday if they meet in Geneva during the mentioned week next >February. So our final decision will be made at that time. Please >stay tuned on this mailinglist. > >4/ For this Rapporteur meeting, Paul Jones acts as meeting organizer, >and myself as document manager. -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0

Fwd: AAP Comments during last call on H245v9
by OKUBO Sakae 13 Dec '02

13 Dec '02

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" This is to forward Mr. Anderson's announcement, which should have been distributed through this reflector but looks not having gone through. Please also note that you can find the mentioned Avaya's comments in Word form at the following place: http://standard.pictel.com/ftp/avc-site/0210_Gen/lc1_H245_Avaya.zip """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:20:24 -0500 >From: Terry L Anderson <tlatla(a)verizon.net> >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en >To: ITU SG-16 <ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com>, tsg16q3@itu.int,tsgwp2@itu.int >Subject: AAP Comments during last call on H245v9 >X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at >out002.verizon.net from [138.89.124.43] at Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:20:35 >-0600 >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 23:15:45.0551 (UTC) >FILETIME=[908EF9F0:01C2A2FD] >Sender: owner-tsg16q3(a)itu.int >Reply-To: Terry L Anderson <tlatla(a)verizon.net> >X-Biglobe-VirusCheck: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:21:17 +0900 > >A new version of H.245 (version 9) was consented at the October >Study Group 16 meeting in Geneva. One official comment was submitted >by Avaya against H.245 V9 during the last call period. According to >ITU procedures we need to resolve this issue and then have an >"additional review" (a second last call) before it can be considered >approved. > >The issue raised by Avaya concerned the use of encrypted media >channels for MoIP and included specific suggestions for additional >ASN.1 items and description in H.245 to support this. The changes >are not extensive. > >From the comment: > >>Introduction >>As it now stands, version 9 of H.245 does not permit the >>specification of encryption of media channels using the new >>Modem-over-IP (MoIP) data types RedundancyEncoding, >>MultiplePayloadStream, and FECdata. Inasmuch as these types of >>channels can be subject to eavesdropping, and can carry the same >>information as other audio or data channels, it seems appropriate >>to provide the means to encrypt them. > >The issue and suggested changes have been discussed by several of >parties involved with the MoIP work (Paul Jones, Cisco, Martin >Euchner and Sasha Ruditsky along with Bob Gilman from Avaya) and >they support the suggested changes. > >As rapporteur, I am proposing that adopt the suggested changes and >submit the revised version for the Additional Review at the next >review period (I believe in January) unless there are objections >from others. Any discussion should be sent to the >ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com reflector. I am including the >tsg16q3 and tsg16wp2 lists in this message so that all interested >parties are aware of the process. If I do not see any objections by >17:00 UT a week from today, Dec 20, we will proceed with the >additional review of the text as revised. > >For those with TIES logins, the Avaya comment document can be accessed at: > http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/aap/sg16aap/recaap/h245v9/lcc/index.html > >For any that may not, I will summarize the changes below: >1. Annex A (page 47) >Add the new data types RedundancyEncoding, MultiplePayloadStream, >and FECdata to H235Media. This will permit the specification of >encryption for these data types in the same way it is specified for >other media types. > >As follows: >H235Media ::=SEQUENCE >{ > encryptionAuthenticationAndIntegrity >EncryptionAuthenticationAndIntegrity, > mediaType CHOICE > { > nonStandard NonStandardParameter, > videoData VideoCapability, > audioData AudioCapability, > data DataApplicationCapability, > ..., > redundancyEncoding RedundancyEncoding, > multiplePayloadStream MultiplePayloadStream, > fec FECData > }, > > ... >} >---------------------------------------- >2. Annex B, Section B.3.1 (page 108) >Add a description of the use of H235Media in DataType to indicate >that the channel is to be encrypted. > >As follows: >A dataType of h235Media is used to specify encryption of the logical >channel; the actual >data type is indicted within H235Media, along with the encryption >specification. >----------------------------------------- >3. Annex B, Section B.3.1 (page 111) >Add a description of the use of redundancyEncoding for media >encryption when the dataType specifies multiple payload types within >the channel. > >As follows: >When encryption is specified for a channel carrying multiple >payloads, redundancy encoding using RFC 2198 is used to preserve the >actual payload types transmitted. The Encapsulating payload type is >set to the value specified in the syncFlag field of the >encryptionSync element. > >-- >------------------------------------------------------- >Terry L Anderson tlatla(a)verizon.net >Voice: +1 908.766.4463 Mobile: +1 908.342.9595 >http://www.gti.net/tla >------------------------------------------------------- -- Best regards, OKUBO Sakae e-mail: okubo(a)giti.waseda.ac.jp ******************************************************************* YRP Office Global Information and Telecommunication Institute (GITI) Waseda University YRP Ichibankan 312 Tel: +81 468 47 5406 3-4 Hikarinooka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa-ken Fax: +81 468 47 5413 239-0847 Japan GITI Headquarter 29-7 Waseda University Bldg. Tel: +81 3 5286 3831 1-3-10 Nishi-Waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Fax: +81 3 5286 3832 169-0051 Japan ******************************************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv(a)lists.intel.com

1 0