Hans,
Guntram's comment is true in terms of the way H.323 talks about "transport addresses". However, in response to your first direct question, please note that it is not mandatory for a gatekeeper to accept any particular registration - that is up to some combination of implementation and configuration.
Regards, Chris
Guntram Diehl wrote:
Hi Hans, yes, you have to map IP address + port to an alias. The H.323 standard only talks about "transport addresses" which have to be mapped. And a transport address in the IP case consists of addr+port. Guntram
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Hans Viens [mailto:hviens@MEDIATRIX.COM] Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Mai 2001 14:48 An: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Betreff: Gatekeeper behavior question
Hi folks!
I just want to pin point a place on the H.323 standard that talk about the behavior of a gatekeeper on a specific scenario. My question is: Is it mandatory for a gatekeeper to accept the registration of a unit using 1 IP address and supporting mutiple H.323 endpoint (multiple ports) (i.e EP1: 192.168.0.1:2000; EP2: 192.168.0.1:2001 ... ) ? Also, is it mandatory for a gatekeeper to translate the alias of an endpoint with both its IP address & port number ?
If you could help me to point me to a section in the H.323 standard, I would appreciate it!
Regards,
Hans
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
-- Dr Chris Purvis -- Development Manager ISDN Communications Ltd, The Stable Block, Ronans, Chavey Down Road Winkfield Row, Berkshire. RG42 6LY ENGLAND Phone: +44 1344 899 007 Fax: +44 1344 899 001
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com