Paul,
I agree.
Bob
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert
Callaghan
Siemens
Enterprise Networks
Tel: +1.561.997-3756 Fax: +1.561.997-3403
Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com
--------------------------------------------------------
-----Original
Message-----
From: Francois Audet
[mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001
7:42 PM
To: Callaghan, Robert; 'Glenn
FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul
JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Private telephone
number in H.323v4
Hi
Bob,
I
understand what you are saying (and I fully agree). However, H.323v4 section
7.8.2.1 on Calling party number contradicts H.225.0 with the following:
When address
information represents a telephone number, the relevant information may appear
in the Calling Party Number IE. This IE contains the caller's number,
information about the number, and presentation and screening indicators found
in octet 3a. This is the recommended mode of operation for the case where a
PSTN Gateway sends a Setup message on the packet network.
Alternatively, calling party information may appear in the sourceAddress, presentationIndicator, and screeningIndicator fields of the Setup message.
This mode of operation is required when the sourceAddress is not in any form of telephone
number (i.e., sourceAddress is not type a dialedDigits or partyNumber).
I'm
saying that H.323v4 is misleading and should really say the
following to be consistent with H.225.0v4.
When address
information represents a public (E.164) telphone number or a telephone number of unknown
type, the
relevant information may appear in the Calling Party Number IE. This IE
contains the caller's number, information about the number, and presentation
and screening indicators found in octet 3a. This is the recommended mode of
operation for the case where a PSTN Gateway sends a Setup message on the packet
network.
Alternatively,
calling party information may appear in the sourceAddress, presentationIndicator, and screeningIndicator fields of the Setup message.
This mode of operation is required when the sourceAddress is not in any form of a public or unknown telephone
number (i.e., sourceAddress is not type a dialedDigits or partyNumber.164Number); an example of
such a case is a Private Number which shall be encoded in a
sourceAddress.partyNumber.privateNumber.
Same
applies for 7.8.2.2.
Right?
-----Original
Message-----
From: Callaghan, Robert
[mailto:Robert.Callaghan@icn.siemens.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001
11:59 AM
To: Audet, Francois
[SC2:4K02:EXCH]; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul
JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Private telephone
number in H.323v4
Francois,
See H.225.0 Section 7.2.2.4
(Called Party Number):
Numbering plan identification (octet #3, bit 1-4)
- Encoded following the values and
rules of Table 4-9/Q.931. If set to "1001" (Private Numbering Plan)
in a packet based network originated call, this indicates that (1)the E.164
address is not present in SETUP, and (2)the call will be routed via an alias
address in the user-to-user information.
This says that the
identification of the Private Number Plan requires the call to be routed based
on an alias address in the UUI.
This also means that the Private Number Plan cannot indicate that a
number conforming to a private numbering plan is present in the IE.
It is possible to use the
value indicating an Unknown Number Plan and place a private number in the
IE. However, this is only a digit
string without any defined structure.
Bob
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Callaghan
Siemens Enterprise Networks
Tel:
+1.561.997-3756 Fax: +1.561.997-3403
Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com
--------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Audet
[mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001
1:40 PM
To: Callaghan, Robert; 'Glenn
FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul
JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Private telephone
number in H.323v4
Hi
Bob,
I'm
not sure I understand your point.
The
way I read it now:
·
H.323 says "Put a private number in the
Q.931 IE"; and
·
H.225.0 says "Put a private number in the
UUIE".
Which
one is it? I think you are saying H.225.0 is right (I tend to agree and so does
Paul). We need to make sure everybody does (Glenn in particular), and H.323
should be clarified, because I would assume most people who read it will think
they are supposed to put the IE in the Q.931 information element.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Callaghan,
Robert [SMTP:Robert.Callaghan@icn.siemens.com]
Sent: Wednesday,
June 20, 2001 05:00
To: Audet,
Francois [SC2:4K02:EXCH]; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16
ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE:
Private telephone number in H.323v4
Francois,
The problem is that both H.323 and H.225.0 state
that in the Q.931 elements used for "telephone numbers" the code
point indicating the presence of a private number is used to indicate that the
address is in the UUI. It is not possible to conform to this usage and to
use this value to indicate that the Q.931 element contains a private number.
Bob
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Callaghan
Siemens
Enterprise Networks
Tel:
+1.561.997-3756 Fax: +1.561.997-3403
Email:
Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com <mailto:Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com>
--------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:27
PM
To: Callaghan, Robert; 'Glenn
FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul
JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: Private telephone number
in H.323v4
Hi,
I just realize a contradiction in H.323v4 and
H.225.0v4 concerning the encoding of "private telephone numbers"
(i.e., the type we all use at work):
· H.225.0v4
says that "Private telephone numbers" shall be encoded in the UUIE as
private numbers, and NOT in the Q.931 information elements (Calling party IE,
etc.). Let's call this the "Bob method". See Table 18/H.225.0 Note 1.
· H.323v4
says that the Q.931 information element is used for "telephone
numbers", and that the UUIE is used for things that are not telephone
numbers. Let's call this the "Glenn method". See H.323v4/7.8.2.1 and
7.8.2.2.
There
is no conflict with both method for "public" telephone number, but
there is a conflict for "private" telephone numbers.
Which method is right, Bob's or Glenn's?
----
François AUDET, Nortel Networks
<mailto:audet@nortelnetworks.com>, tel:+1 408 495 3756