By default, I believe that editor would be me.  This annex was intended to work with H.323v2 systems and later, but you are correct that there was no way to specify T.38 until H.245v4.

 

Of course, H.323v2 systems used H.245v3.  H.323v3 systems used H.245v3 or higher (the key element).  So, I suppose the question is: is H.323v3 required?  Surely not, as there are implementations out there.  We have argued about whether H.323v2 systems could use later versions of H.245.  The outcome was "no"-- perhaps that needs to be revisited.

There have been recent changes to H.245 ASN.1 to support T.38.  At least there have been some proposed changes.  Unfortunately, I missed much of that discussion.  The meeting report says that those changes were added to H.245v6.

 

Mike, is it true that the T.38-related changes from H.245v4 to H.245v6 were nothing more than additions to H.245-- not "changes", per se.  Also, did the proposed changes (from TD8/WP2, I believe) make it into H.245v6?

As for Annex D, I am considering just pulling that into the H.323 document, rather than keeping it as a separately published annex-- does anybody object to that?  That would certainly address questions related to references going forward.  However, we need to reach a decision about the current publication.  I suspect we need something for the IG, but the problem is that H.323v2 is "old news" now.  What to do....