Paul, here are some editorial changes: * H.323v7: - it is better to remove the whitespace in front of each opening parenthesis in an OID as it makes it easier to understand when a number is associated with an identifier and avoid any confusion in the case a number without an associated identifier is followed by a number (a possible case) - clause 2: Add a reference to the ITU-T X.680 series as well as to X.690 and X.691 since both BER and PER are mentioned; I see a normative reference to X.680 in Annex R: This is unusual! - clause 4: OID is not defined as an acronym for Object-Id (I would prefer not to use that acronym throughout the text, though!) - Clause M4.5.3: Add an OID to the ASN.1 module; is this the only ASN.1 module in that standard? - M5.3: 'i' missing in OBJECT IDENTIFIER in the first sentence * H.225.0v7: - Clause 2 doesn't reference the latest edition of the X.680 and X.690 series - Annex H: Add an OID to the ASN.1 module - Table VI.1: remove leading zeroes within icd-ecma(0012) - it is also better to remove the whitespace in front of each opening parenthesis in an OID as it makes it easier to understand when a number is associated with an identifier and avoid any confusion in the case a number without an associated identifier is followed by a number (a possible case) * H.460.geo: - Clause 2: replace "ISOC/IETF" with "IETF" * General remark: As approved by TSAG last year, the new way of referencing an ITU-T Recommendation is "Recommendation ITU-T H.xxx" in clause 2 and "ITU-T H.xxx" as a reference in the body. I am Cc'ing Sébastien Castano from the TSB in case he can find some time to check the ASN.1 modules in H.323v7 and H.225.0v7. -- Olivier DUBUISSON, ITU-T ASN.1 & OID Project leader France Telecom NSM/RD/DDEV - BP 50702 - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France tel: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - fax: +33 1 58 15 52 05 Paul E. Jones wrote:
Q2/16 Experts,
There are several draft documents that are scheduled for consent at the October/November 2009 meeting in Q2. They are: H.323v7, H.323 Annex I (use of new FEC procedures defined in the IETF), H.225.0v7, H.460.geo (transmission of geographic information in H.323), H.460.23 (NAT determination), and H.460.24 (point-to-point media flow through NAT).
Pointers to the current editors’ draft documents can be found here:
http://www.packetizer.com/ipmc/h323/doc_status.html
I would like to kindly request that you give these documents a thorough review and do one of two things:
1) Submit a contribution to the next SG16 meeting proposing changes to these texts
2) Provide your comments via the list or directly to the editor; the editor will address any minor editorial issues in the text and prepare a contribution for technical changes (if necessary)
I want to keep these documents on schedule, so your input and comments would be very helpful.
Of course, if you have any questions or comments, I am more than happy to provide input.
Thanks,
Paul E. Jones
Rapporteur, ITU-T Q2/16