What we called text chat in T.120 is nowadays called real-time text. It is text used mainly for conversation. Sent time-sampled in e.g. 300 ms sample intervals, so that the users get a good feeling of contact. In ITU, it is supported by the T.134 application in the T.120 family, By H.323 Annex G And by H.248.2 It is only defined for usage during a session. IM is traditionally not sent until the user makes a send request. A RETURN or ckicking a send button. I do not see any favour of that tradition compared to real-time text during sessions. So, for use during sessions, I think we are done. There are IM protocols that can be used outside a session. That may be handy. Gunnar ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gunnar Hellström Omnitor <mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se Tel: +46708204288 <http://www.omnitor.se> www.omnitor.se _____ From: itu-sg16-bounces@lists.packetizer.com [mailto:itu-sg16-bounces@lists.packetizer.com] On Behalf Of Gary Sullivan Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:14 PM To: Paul E. Jones; itu-sg16@lists.packetizer.com Subject: Re: [itu-sg16] Instant Messaging in H.323 & Common AlertingProtocol(CAP) Paul et al, What is the difference between "IM" and "text chat"? And how do these efforts relate to the following?: T.134 Text chat in data conferencing T.140 Protocol for multimedia application text conversation V.18 Text telephony Best Regards, Gary Sullivan _____ From: itu-sg16-bounces@lists.packetizer.com [mailto:itu-sg16-bounces@lists.packetizer.com] On Behalf Of Paul E. Jones Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 9:23 PM To: itu-sg16@lists.packetizer.com Subject: [itu-sg16] Instant Messaging in H.323 & Common Alerting Protocol(CAP) Folks, We have debated the introduction of a method of sending IMs within H.323 for years. Its unfortunate, especially considering how the H.323 infrastructure so easily lends itself to such functionality. There was a renewed hope with some documents introduced during the Shenzhen meeting that suggested a means of sending IM within the context of a call, as well as outside the context of a call. One of the other matters we were asked to consider within the context of H.323 and H.248 is the transmission of emergency messages using a format called the Common Alerting Protocol. During the Shenzhen meeting, we sent a liaison to SG17 urging them to consider the creation of an ASN.1 specification that would more readily transport within H.323 networks. I can report that, not only did they do that, it has been put forward for consent already. The standard will be X.1303. So, the next step is to define procedures for transporting X.1303 (CAP) messages within H.323. Initially, I considered creating an H.460.x extension, but then I thought that a better solution might be to use something like H.450.7 (Message Waiting Indicator). But, as I thought about this, perhaps the best way is to marry this with the Instant Messaging proposals weve seen before. If we were to standardize the ability to send instant messages within H.323, both within and outside the context of a call, then it would be possible to send X.1303 messages as an instant message. This does introduce a new requirement, though, in that we ought to tag the type of message so that it is properly treated. Instant Messages might appear unprocessed on the users screen, whereas X.1303 messages must be decoded and formatted for human readability. So, I would like to draft a proposal for this upcoming SG16 meeting to do precisely what I said: lets move forward on the work of sending IM messages within H.323, adding a tag that indicates the type of message. We can also utilize the call priority procedures in H.460.4 in order to ensure that an emergency CAP message gets higher priority through the network. Does this sound reasonable and acceptable? Do others have other proposals? If it is acceptable, then I have a question of procedure. The proposals for instant messaging were not accepted as new work items for Q2, though they were not rejected: the request was for further progress. Unfortunately, the contributor is not a member of the ITU, which leaves us in a difficult situation. As a possible means forward somebody might volunteer to submit these documents as formal contributions to this SG16 meeting under their companys name. Is that agreeable and are there any volunteers? Do you have another idea for how we can support X.1303 (CAP)? Thanks, Paul __________ NOD32 2283 (20070521) Information __________ Detta meddelande är genomsökt av NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.nod32.com