Even if Progress Indicator IE is optional in H.225.0 for sending, it shall be mandatory to support (and act upon) if received. Otherwise, the rules we established recently in v4 on the subject of controlling tones and announcements provided from B (or from a Gateway) to a calling EP A would not work well.
Note that there are some applications (like Call Park) where we use PROGRESS message as the first end-to-end backward message which does not necessarily require a Progress Indicator IE.
Regards, Karl Klaghofer
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@NORTELNETWORKS.COM] Gesendet am: Donnerstag, 31. August 2000 19:37 An: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com Betreff: Re: Progress Indicator IE in a PROGRESS Message
I kind of vaguely remember that being a bug in an early version of Q.931. Pretty fuzzy however.
-----Original Message----- From: Glen Freundlich [ mailto:ggf@AVAYA.COM mailto:ggf@AVAYA.COM ] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 7:06 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Progress Indicator IE in a PROGRESS Message
I don't recall intentionally leaving the Progress Indicator IE optional - this looks like a mistake to me.
Glen
Rich Bowen wrote:
This may have been an oversight -- I'm not sure a Progress message without a Progress Indicator makes any sense. Having only been involved in this area for the last couple of years, I'll have to rely on someone else to provide the original reason why this was made optional.
This IE was also optional in H.225.0 v2. However, section 7.2.2.23 of the v4 draft indicates that it is mandatory for a gateway to forward this IE from ISDN to H.323.
Rich Bowen
"Wuerfel, Randy P" wrote:
In reading through APC-1939 (draft H.225.0 V4) for the Portland meeting,
I
noticed that the Progress Indicator IE is shown as "O", optional, in the
PROGRESS message. It is also shown this way in my copy of H.225.0 V3. However, in Q.931 the Progress Indicator IE is mandatory in the PROGRESS
message.
Is there some reason why, for H.225.0 usage, the Progress Indicator IE
in
the PROGRESS message is optional rather than mandatory, or was this an oversight?
Randy Wuerfel Siemens Enterprise Networks 4900 Old Ironsides Drive Fax: (408) 492-4666 M/S 200 Tel: (408) 492-4375 P.O. Box 58075 E-mail: Randy.P.Wuerfel@icn.siemens.com Santa Clara, CA 95052-8075
For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.comFor help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com