Francois,
I
realize how this could be confusing, but I don't necessarily see a conflict
since they all say, "may." For example, if I say, "X may do A or B," and, "X may
do B," that does not preclude "X may do A." Conversely, if I said "shall"
instead of "may," I think there would be real conflicts. I've worked on EPs that
are very aggressive during call establishment. For example, Setup contains an
h245Address and indicates support for Fast Connect and H.245 Tunneling. Other
than all the non-compliant EPs out there, it worked just fine. The EPs also
support third-party pause, but I don't remember ever testing that particular
scenario. As long as an EP is implemented correctly, I don't see anything in the
Recommendation that would prevent this from working.
Paul
Long
ipDialog, Inc.
Guys,
H.323/8.1.7.2 says
:
After establishment of a call using
the Fast Connect procedure, either endpoint may determine that it is
necessary to invoke call features that require the use of H.245 procedures.
Either endpoint may initiate the use of H.245 procedures at any point
during the call, using tunnelling as described in 8.2.1 (if h245Tunnelling remains enabled) or a separate H.245
connection. The process for switching to a separate H.245 connection is
described in 8.2.3.
8.2.3
says:
When
H.245 encapsulation or Fast Connect is being used, either endpoint may
choose to switch to using the separate H.245 connection at any
time.
There seem to be
some contradiction in there: is it "after establishment" or "at any
time"?
Do you have to
wait for after CONNECT to establish a separate H.245 channel or
not?
The case I'm
interested in would be to send SETUP with fastStart, then receive ALERTING
with fastStart. Then can either end initiate H.245 before CONNECT? If
so, what if third party pause and redirection is initiated before
CONNECT?
----
François AUDET, Nortel Networks