FYI - I asked the IETF area directors to give me a guidance on requesting a
BOF. I have not heard anything yet. I'll keep you posted.
Regards,
Joon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy, Radhika R, ALARC [mailto:rrroy@att.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 5:02 PM
> To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com
> Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
>
>
> Hi, Everyone:
>
> Both Dave and Joon made good points. In addition to the
> upcoming SG16 Rap.
> meeting, I would assume that Joon, Dave, and others will also
> be willing to
> work for the BOF in the upcoming IETF meeting (March'00).
>
> We have to focus in both organizations: IETF and SG16. Once
> we show our
> interest, the rest will be fine.
>
> The most important point is that we have start our work: SIP-H.323
> Interworking Standard.
>
> Best regards,
> Radhika R. Roy
> AT&T
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Walker [SMTP:drwalker@ss8networks.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 5:35 PM
> > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
> >
> > It depends what the outcome of the work is. The first step
> must be to
> > define what our goals are. I don't want to pre-judge what
> the outcome
> > is going to be until I know what we're actually trying to achieve.
> >
> > One possible eventual outcome could be an H.246 type document that
> > provides a message by message, field by field mapping
> between H.323 and
> > SIP, or we might only define a high level profile that states which
> > procedures an implementation should and should not use in
> order to ensure
> > interworking (e.g. "H.323 endpoints shall use fast
> connect"). So it's
> > not clear that we're going to need an ITU recommendation,
> possibly a BCP
> > RFC or some ITU equivalent might suffice. If the SIP and/or H.323
> > specifications need to be changed to address our interworking goals,
> > it's again not clear that new standards are needed, both
> SIP and H.323
> > can tweaked if needed. If its determined that one or both of the
> > protocols needs a major overhaul in order to support
> interworking, then
> > it's probably a sign that the goals for interworking
> weren't appropriate.
> >
> > What we need to do is to ensure that all interested parties
> are able to
> > participate fully in the discussions. That kind of open
> process is the
> > norm in the IETF. I'd be unhappy to see a situation where I had to
> > spend thousands of dollars to join a consortium just to access a few
> > drafts or subscribe to a mailing list.
> >
> > The argument is often made that the ITU has the H.323
> experts and the IETF
> > has the SIP experts, but in fact the overlap of these
> experts is probably
> > larger than they'd care to admit. Despite what is written
> in the meeting
> > report, there is enough interest in SG16 to keep the work
> moving there.
> > There is obviously interest in the IETF as well.
> >
> > I agree with the proposal that a BOF be held at the next IETF where
> > interested experts can attempt to resolve the scope of the
> work and gauge
> > the IETF's interest in owning it. Due to the reluctance shown by SG
> > management in the recent SG16 meeting, the door certainly
> seems open to
> > allowing the IETF ownership. Input to the BOF should at least be an
> > I-D based on the document written by RadVision, as well as the
> > Singh/Schulzrinne draft.
> >
> > Dave Walker
> > SS8 Networks
> > Ottawa Canada
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mailing list for parties associated with ITU-T Study Group 16
> > [mailto:ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM]On Behalf Of Joon Maeng
> > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 3:35 PM
> > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
> >
> >
> > I would propose that it should be a combined work with
> IETF. Ideally we
> > should get ITU recommendation number and ITU RFC number for the same
> > document when it is complete. If you look at SIP-H.323
> interworking,
> > there
> > are certain components that have to be standardized. (We
> will need more
> > than
> > interworking guidelines.)
> > Regards,
> > Joon
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Roy, Radhika R, ALARC [mailto:rrroy@att.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 10:46 AM
> > > To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com
> > > Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi, Everyone:
> > >
> > > We are all aware that many works related to H.323-SIP
> > > Interworking works are
> > > being proposed including IMTC and TIPHON. I am also in
> touch with Ayse
> > > Dilber of AT&T. These organizations are primarily chartered for
> > > interoperability agreements, testing, etc. and do NOT create
> > > standards per
> > > se. Like TIPHON, they are willing to send a liaison to
> the ITU-T SG16
> > > recommending the requirements.
> > >
> > > In the same fashion, TIPHON and IMTC are also working for
> > > H.323 mobility
> > > works. That does not mean that the SG16 should not do the
> > > H.323 mobility
> > > work.
> > >
> > > The H.323 and SIP standards are created by the ITU-T and
> > > IETF, respectively
> > > and these standards organizations are the right bodies to
> create the
> > > standards that are recognized internationally.
> > >
> > > I am again quoting from decision taken in the last SG16
> meeting TD-74
> > > (Plen), Section 3.8.5.1, p-48:
> > >
> > > "... Invite contributions on how to approach the work. Need
> > > to get scenarios
> > > for progressing work in a controlled architectural approach.
> > > Ms. Levin has
> > > volunteered to draft a framework. ..."
> > >
> > > We are proceeding to work along this line in the SG16.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Radhika R. Roy
> > > AT&T
> > > +1 732 420 1580
> > > rrroy(a)att.com
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M CS 27
> > > [SMTP:Istvan.Sebestyen@ICN.SIEMENS.DE]
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 9:27 AM
> > > > To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > > > Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
> > > > Importance: High
> > > >
> > > > Dear Colleagues,
> > > > I was present at the SG16 meeting, and have also read now
> > > carefully the
> > > > meeting report. There is really at this point in time in
> > > the ITU no new
> > > > "workitem" or "question" open for this work. Certainly this
> > > might change
> > > > if
> > > > based on contributions SG16 decides so.
> > > >
> > > > You might, however, be interested that in the IMTC a lot of
> > > very similar
> > > > work is already being done.
> > > > Have a view of the program of the aHIT! Working Group
> > > (chaired by Ayse
> > > > Dilber (adilber(a)att.com)) of AT&T), described below.
> > > > I am sure Ayse will be more than happy to see more
> active co-workers
> > > > pushing
> > > > the work of aHIT! ahead. The aHIT! program was approved
> > > within the IMTC in
> > > > November 1999, and now it is running full speed.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > > Istvan sebestyen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > aHIT! AG's Objectives:
> > > >
> > > > - Identify VoIP and Multimedia Applications (i.e., VoIP, FoIP,
> > > > Conferencing,
> > > > Instant Messaging, etc.) which will enable service
> > > providers to implement
> > > > end-to-end services;
> > > > - Identify Interworking Scenarios (i.e., between H.323 and
> > > > SIP/H.248-MEGACO/cable/etc.) to achieve interworking
> > > between different
> > > > protocols to support multi-vendor and multi-service
> > > provider environments;
> > > > - Develop technical interoperability documents per
> > > application and per
> > > > scenario to guide service providers and vendors to
> > > implement seamless,
> > > > secure, global VoIP and Multimedia Applications;
> > > > - Encourage, define and participate in global VoIP and
> Multimedia
> > > > applications trials between member service providers and vendors
> > > > - Provide a forum for open technical exchange;
> > > > - Support, promote and participate in IMTC/ETSI testing events.
> > > >
> > > > aHIT! AG Work Plan:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Define technical lower layer communications capabilities
> > > and protocols
> > > > for each application.
> > > > 2) Work on interworking between H.323 and SIP/NCS/H.248-MEGACO.
> > > > 3) Introduce the value-added functionalities and
> enhanced services.
> > > > 4) Develop and publish technical interoperability documents per
> > > > application/scenario starting from 2Q00.
> > > >
> > > > aHIT! AG will address the following issues for each
> application,:
> > > >
> > > > Performance/QoS
> > > > Reliability
> > > > Naming/Numbering/Addressing
> > > > Settlements/Billing
> > > > Fax Support
> > > > OAM&P Support
> > > > Number Portability
> > > > Interworking Issues(i.e.,H.323/SIP/MEGACO/NCS and CCS/PSTN)
> > > > Enhanced Services (i.e., roaming)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ------------
> > > > Dr. Istvan Sebestyen
> > > > Siemens AG, ICN M CS27,
> > > > Hofmannstr. 51 D-81359 Munich
> > > > Tel:+49-89-722-47230
> > > > Fax:+49-89-722-47713
> > > > E-Mail office: istvan.sebestyen(a)icn.siemens.de;
> istvan(a)sebestyen.de
> > > > E-mail private: istvan_sebestyen(a)yahoo.com;
> > > > Siemens
> > > Intranet:http://netinfo.icn.siemens.de/es/team/essp/team/essp4
> > > > Siemens FTP: ftp://mchhpn006a.mch.pn.siemens.de
> > > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ------------
> > > > --
> > > > ----------------
> > > >
> > > > > ----------
> > > > > From: Roy, Radhika R, ALARC[SMTP:rrroy@ATT.COM]
> > > > > Reply To: Mailing list for parties associated with
> > > ITU-T Study Group
> > > > > 16
> > > > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 1:58 PM
> > > > > To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [H.323-SIP/Internet] The reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi, Everyone:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am in full agreement with Orit. I guess that this has
> > > also been the
> > > > case
> > > > > for many people who had been present in the SG16 meeting.
> > > > >
> > > > > More importantly, when I talked to Glen, he clearly
> > > indicated that we
> > > > > should
> > > > > bring contributions to get the work started. The
> > > interworking between
> > > > > H.323
> > > > > and SIP may belong Q.14 (although it has to be discussed
> > > jointly with
> > > > Q.13
> > > > > and Q.14).
> > > > >
> > > > > There has been a very strong interest for the work of
> H.323-SIP
> > > > > Interworking. A large number of people throughout the
> > > world (starting
> > > > from
> > > > > the ITU-T and IETF) is contacting me.
> > > > >
> > > > > The primary goal of the standard bodies is to provide
> > > > "INTEROPERABILITY."
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Radhika R. Roy
> > > > > AT&T
> > > > > +1 732 420 1580
> > > > > rrroy(a)att.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
