Christian, Since the IG is not normative on H.248v1 (or any other "v" for that matter), and v1 is not interoperable and possible not even implementable without it (correct me if I'm wrong), it seems like we have two alternatives: 1. Move forward with v2 ASAP and hope that absolutely _nobody_ deploys a v1 entity. (If it were a true v1-compliant entity, it would be broken because v1 is broken; if it were a v1+IG entity, it wouldn't be v1-compliant.) 2. Produce a v1 Corrigendum so that a v1 entity is viable. Paul Long ipDialog, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Mailing list for parties associated with ITU-T Study Group 16 [mailto:ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM]On Behalf Of Christian Groves Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 8:39 PM To: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Implementors Guide not normative? G'Day, Personally as I've mentioned in previous meetings I would support the approval of v2 to bring in the changes from the IGs. I feel that a 80 page corrigenda to a 134pg H.248v1 isn't very practical. It will also help interoperability if you receive a v2 message then you know exactly to expect. At previous interops different groups have implemented different IG versions. With regards to the 2 year guideline it would be 20 months between the decision and the consent date for the recommendation. By the time the consent period is finished and the recommendation is published it would be very close to 2 years. We have had other recommendations in SG16 which have not aligned to the 2 year guideline. Regards, Christian ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com