From: Jim Toga [SMTP:jim.toga@INTEL.COM] This is getting close. One potential problem surrounds intermediaries (for example GKs in a GK-routed call). We need to indicate what exactly is the expected behaviour of 'M' entities when they get 'N' type messages (that look like 'M' messages with extentions.)
I would contend that the reality of the situation is that all we can stipulate, is that the 'M' entities don't crash in the presense of 'N' messages. We can't mandate that 'M's pass new (uninterpreted/not-understood) data on. Obviously if there is an existing opaque field defined, this _shall_ be forwarded.
comments?
I thought I addressed this in the last sentence, "In addition, if a >product is relaying an ASN.1 value, it shall encode the same value that it >decoded, regardless of its own version or the version of the value's sender." This is for intermediate entities such as gatekeepers that relay, or route, call signaling and control messages between entities. My company is not in the gatekeeper business, so with my lack of familiarity I could be off base here, but I believe this statement is necessary to mitigate the earlier statement, "Each product shall _encode_ and decode the H.245 and H.225.0 ASN.1 syntax trees defined in their respective version of H.323." The last sentence sanctions, for example, a v1 gatekeeper relaying v2 messages. I assume this is a requirement and that we can indeed mandate it.
Was I not clear, or did I simply not address your concern?
Paul Long Smith Micro Software, Inc.