This looks good. I would probably change the term "H.323-Internet" to something else. "Internet" sounds a little vague.
On thing that should be mentioned in there is H.245-SDP interworking.
In the case of addressing, we might want to avoid having different translations of SIP telephone numbers (E.164) to H.323 publicNumber, URLs, dialledDigits... At the very least, we should explain the meaning.
I'm not that interested in mapping from H.450 to SIP. However, the "third party pause and re-routing" procedures would be a good candidate.
Then there is in-band tones and anouncements, busy, etc.
Also, the role of gk-routed vs. sip proxy server, and direct-routed vs. sip redirection server.
Also, we should thing of which versions of SIP and H.323 we should consider. My personal preference would be to only look at the latest (H.323v4).
François Audet
-----Original Message----- From: Orit Levin [mailto:orit@radvision.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 1:17 PM To: Taylor, Tom-PT [CAR:B904:EXCH]; rrroy; martinze; ranga.dendi; joon_maeng; Audet, Francois [SC9:4K02:EXCH]; Dave Walker; Paul E. Jones Subject: H.323-SIP Discusssion
Hello all! I put together the ideas for H.323-Internet Interworking discussion/work as the first follow up from Geneva meeting. Please, look into it, comment, provide ideas and additional topics of your interest. Feel free to forward it to whom I forgot... The only reason, I am NOT putting this on the SG16 mailing list, I wouldn't like to create waves outside H.323 community before we have an understanding on the agenda in general. After the first round of remarks, I would like to send it to SG16 mailing list. Regards, Orit Levin RADVision Inc. 575 Corporate Drive Suite 420 Mahwah, NJ 07430 Tel: 1 201 529 4300 (230) Fax: 1 201 529 3516 www.radvision.com http://www.radvision.com orit@radvision.com mailto:orit@radvision.com