According to the text in section 7.2.2.1 of H.323v4 (11/2000), as a response to a RRQ, a GK may respond with an RCF containing a timeToLive that is equal to or less than the timeToLive from the RRQ. This raises two questions:
- Why isn't it allowed for a GK to respond with a greater value, or any value for that matter?
There's no point. After all, the endpoint is permitted to renew its registration earlier than necessary, so if the gatekeeper put in a longer timeToLive an endpoint would not lose by (and probably would) use its preferred value anyway.
- If the EP does not specify a timeToLive, should this be treated as a value of "0" and does this make it impossible for a GK to impose any timeToLive value?
I would suggest that this would imply that the endpoint does not support this feature. I would, on the other hand, have thought (unless one of the standards says otherwise) that a value of "0" would mean that the registration expires immediately, which may not be terribly useful! Not quite the same thing.
Regards, Chris -- 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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com