Paul,
I have an idea about how
to improve H.323 interoperability and inter-version compatibility or at least
raise the visibility of these issues early in the standards process. You know
how IETF RFCs and IDs are required to discuss security considerations, even if
there are none? Here's the description of this in
RFC2223:
9. Security Considerations Section
All RFCs must contain a section near the end of the document
that
discusses the security
considerations of the protocol or
procedures
that are the main topic of
the RFC.
How about requiring or at least strongly recommending
that authors add a section to all APCs and TDs that discusses
Interoperability Considerations? For example, the APC that proposed requiring v4
EPs to use H.245 Tunneling when Fast Connect is used would have had a section
something like this:
x.
Interoperability Considerations
This
proposal precludes v4 and subsequent EPs from interoperating with pre-v4 EPs
that support Fast Connect but do not support H.245 Tunneling. This proposal also
prevents pre-v4 EPs from dependably interoperating with v4 and subsequent EPs
when switching from H.245 Tunneling to a separate H.245 channel because a
v4-or-subsequent EP may or may not support this switching and a pre-v4 EP
which attempts to switch has no way of knowing this ahead of time. The
author believes that these implementations are either
non-existent or extremely rare and therefore impact on interoperability is
minimized.
This section would force
an author to stop and consider interoperability (not that they aren't already).
He or she might then reconsider submitting the contribution altogether,
might modify the proposal to improve interoperability, or at least would be more
aware of the impact it would have on this critical issue. It would also improve
understanding by the contribution's audience because the author would
presumably have a better understanding of the issues than the
reader.
At minimum, this should
be the placeholder in all
contributions:
x. Interoperability
Considerations
Interoperability
considerations are not discussed in this
contribution.
And
this indicates that there are no problems, which would hopefully be the
rule:
x. Interoperability
Considerations
There are no known interoperability
considerations.
This
section should be added to boilerplates. If found missing during
presentation, the editor or another attendee might point this out in order to
prompt discussion or a follow-up TD on interoperability.
Paul
Long
ipDIalog