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

--------------------------------------------------------

-----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