ImCr @€ÃRÍŸ <>Undeliverable: <3077949C05DBD111AB1000A0C9B427E901306AFE@EXCHANGESERVER>c=US;a= ;p=Ganymede Softwar;l=EXCHANGESERVER9907140619370015 M 00C05A6)<ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM> ]GmEwLsReceived: by EXCHANGESERVER with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id <36Y0S2CK>; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:19:38 -0400 Message-ID: <3077949C05DBD111AB1000A0C9B427E901306AFE@EXCHANGESERVER> From: System Administrator <postmaster@Ganymede.com> To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Undeliverable: Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:19:37 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) X-MS-Embedded-Report: Your message To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Sent: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:07:59 -0400 did not reach the following recipient(s): Dan@GANYMEDESOFTWARE.COM on Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:19:37 -0400 The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:Ganymede Software:OLYMPUS:EXCHANGESERVER 0 (000C05A6) Unknown Recipient ----- Message-ID: <199907140607.XAA11547@mailbag.cps.intel.com> From: Undetermined origin c/o LISTSERV administrator <owner-LISTSERV@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM> To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:07:59 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) X-MS-Embedded-Report: 8 ImCr `¿O ÍŸ <>Undeliverable: Use of Alternate Gatekeepers & Implementers Guide<3077949C05DBD111AB1000A0C9B427E901313005@EXCHANGESERVER>c=US;a= ;p=Ganymede Softwar;l=EXCHANGESERVER9907140603340031 M <ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM> ]GmEwLsReceived: by EXCHANGESERVER with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id <36Y0S2B5>; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:03:36 -0400 Message-ID: <3077949C05DBD111AB1000A0C9B427E901313005@EXCHANGESERVER> From: System Administrator <postmaster@Ganymede.com> To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Undeliverable: Use of Alternate Gatekeepers & Implementers Guide Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:03:36 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) X-MS-Embedded-Report: Your message To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Use of Alternate Gatekeepers & Implementers Guide Sent: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 01:51:12 -0400 did not reach the following recipient(s): Dan@GANYMEDESOFTWARE.COM on Wed, 14 Jul 1999 02:03:34 -0400 The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:Ganymede Software:OLYMPUS:EXCHANGESERVER 0 (000C05A6) Unknown Recipient ----- Message-ID: <001101becdbc$e4eb1570$d05467d8@pacbell.net> From: Jean-Francois Mule <jfmule@CLARENT.COM> To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Use of Alternate Gatekeepers & Implementers Guide Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 01:51:12 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) X-MS-Embedded-Report: Context: The implementer's guide (revision D), section 6.2.19 states: "If this information is supplied, an endpoint should retransmit the request to one of the alternate gatekeepers listed". It is also specified that this correction should be applied to 7.8.3 (GRJ), 7.9.3 (RRJ), 7.10.3 (URJ), 7.11.3 (ARJ), 7.12.3(BRJ), 7.13.3(LRJ), 7.14.3 (DRJ), and 7.15.3 (IACK). Editorial comments: 0. IACK does not include altGKInfo ==> 7.15.3 (IACK) should be replaced by 7.15.4 (INAK) which contains altGKInfo Request for comments: 1. The correction is understandable for GRJ, RRJ 2. In the case of altGKInfo received in ARJ for example, some additional clarification would be welcome. Indeed, the endpoint cannot retransmit the request (ARQ) before it has registered successfully with one of the alternate gatekeepers. This comment is also valid for URJ, BRJ, LRJ, DRJ, INAK 3. In the case of a DRJ message (endpoint is being dropped, sends DRQ, gets back DRJ with altGKInfo), should the endpoint register with one of the alternate gatekeepers to send a DRQ message right away? 4. In the case of a gateway endpoint with multiple ports, how should these messages be handled when calls are active? Thank you in advance for any comments, regards Jean-François -------------------------------------------------------- Jean-François Mulé Standards & Architecture Group Clarent Corporation Tel: +1 650 481-2835 700 Chesapeake Drive Fax: +1 650 817-3950 Redwood City, CA 94063 jfmule@clarent.com http://www.clarent.com