Francois,
I
realize how this could be confusing, but I don't necessarily see a
conflict since they all say, "may." For example, if I say, "X may do A or B,"
and, "X may do B," that does not preclude "X may do A." Conversely, if I said
"shall" instead of "may," I think there would be real conflicts. I've worked
on EPs that are very aggressive during call establishment. For example, Setup
contains an h245Address and indicates support for Fast Connect and H.245
Tunneling. Other than all the non-compliant EPs out there, it worked just
fine. The EPs also support third-party pause, but I don't remember ever
testing that particular scenario. As long as an EP is implemented correctly, I
don't see anything in the Recommendation that would prevent this from
working.
Paul
Long
ipDialog, Inc.
Guys,
H.323/8.1.7.2
says :
After establishment of a call
using the Fast Connect procedure, either endpoint may determine that it is
necessary to invoke call features that require the use of H.245
procedures. Either endpoint may initiate the use of H.245 procedures at
any point during the call, using tunnelling as described in 8.2.1 (if
h245Tunnelling remains enabled) or a separate H.245
connection. The process for switching to a separate H.245 connection is
described in 8.2.3.
8.2.3
says:
When
H.245 encapsulation or Fast Connect is being used, either endpoint may
choose to switch to using the separate H.245 connection at any
time.
There seem to be
some contradiction in there: is it "after establishment" or "at any
time"?
Do you have to
wait for after CONNECT to establish a separate H.245 channel or
not?
The case I'm
interested in would be to send SETUP with fastStart, then receive ALERTING
with fastStart. Then can either end initiate H.245 before CONNECT? If
so, what if third party pause and redirection is initiated before
CONNECT?
----
François AUDET, Nortel Networks