On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Paul Long wrote:
Paul,
I just checked, and we are shipping v3 EPs. I agree that there are probably many more v2 entities than v3 entities, and therefore if we have to break one, we should break the one which will have the least impact on the market.
To minimize the impact this will have on interoperability, however, let's don't simply move the reasons around. Instead, lets deprecate the current routeCallToSCN and aliasesInconsistent reasons using the following syntaxes in IGv3 and H.225.0v4.
Proposed IGv3 syntax
AdmissionRejectReason ::= CHOICE { calledPartyNotRegistered NULL, -- cannot translate address invalidPermission NULL, -- permission has expired requestDenied NULL, -- no bandwidth available undefinedReason NULL, callerNotRegistered NULL, routeCallToGatekeeper NULL, invalidEndpointIdentifier NULL, resourceUnavailable NULL, ..., securityDenial NULL, qosControlNotSupported NULL, incompleteAddress NULL,
-- changes start here: deprecatedAliasesInconsistent NULL, -- do not use deprecatedRouteCallToSCN SEQUENCE OF PartyNumber, -- do not use callCapacityExceeded NULL, -- destination has exceeded call capacity aliasesInconsistent NULL, -- multiple aliases in request identify distinct people routeCallToSCN SEQUENCE OF PartyNumber }
Proposed H.225.0v4 syntax
AdmissionRejectReason ::= CHOICE { calledPartyNotRegistered NULL, -- cannot translate address invalidPermission NULL, -- permission has expired requestDenied NULL, -- no bandwidth available undefinedReason NULL, callerNotRegistered NULL, routeCallToGatekeeper NULL, invalidEndpointIdentifier NULL, resourceUnavailable NULL, ..., securityDenial NULL, qosControlNotSupported NULL, incompleteAddress NULL,
-- changes start here: deprecatedAliasesInconsistent NULL, -- do not use deprecatedRouteCallToSCN SEQUENCE OF PartyNumber, -- do not use exceedsCallCapacity NULL, -- destination does not have the capacity for this call aliasesInconsistent NULL, -- multiple aliases in request identify distinct people routeCallToSCN SEQUENCE OF PartyNumber, collectDestination NULL, collectPIN NULL }
Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying, the "-- do not use" will not work if the receiver is using an earlier version in which the "-- do not use" type is defined, for it violates X.680 clause 24.14:
24.14 A value for a given extension addition type shall not be specified unless there are values specified for all extension addition types not marked OPTIONAL or DEFAULT that lie logically between the extension addition type and the extension root.
NOTE 1 -Where the type has grown from the extension root (version 1) through version 2 to version 3 by the addition of extension additions, the presence in an encoding of any addition from version 3 requires the presence of an encoding of all additions in version 2 that are not marked OPTIONAL or DEFAULT.
Omitting OPTIONAL and DEFAULT from an extension addition definition means that an extension addition value is mandatory in messages that are originated by an implementation in which such extension additions are defined, which implies that an encoding cannot have a missing mandatory extension addition value followed by any other component.
The only way that interoperability can be achieved here is by the older version H.225 spec being changed to add OPTIONAL to those items marked with "-- do not use". It will have no effect on the bits on the wire, other than to make such encodings valid.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bancroft Scott Toll Free :1-888-OSS-ASN1 OSS Nokalva International:1-732-302-0750 baos@oss.com Tech Support :1-732-302-9669 x-1 1-732-302-9669 x-200 Fax :1-732-302-0023
I assume we can change both because neither are Decided and these are true irreconcilable errors in the documents, correct? Here are the specifics: We rename the old reasons to "deprecate*", add the new ones after callCapacityExceeded/exceedsCallCapacity, and then in the text of IGv3 and H.225.0v4 say that the old ones shall not be transmitted and if received shall be treated like undefinedReason. Otherwise, a receiver would have to parse the AdmissionReject message differently depending on the version of the transmitter. We, Smith Micro, can actually do that with our ASN.1 parser but I'm guessing that most implementations cannot. Maybe we should even change the type of deprecatedRouteCallToSCN to NULL so that the ASN.1 PER parser would simply skip over the contents via the encapsulating open type. I know that our parser would do this. Would others?
v1 implementations won't have a problem, because they would ignore this reason, anyway, but we could encourage v2 implementations to treat aliasesInconsistent like undefinedReason since they won't know if it is aliasesInconsistent from a v2 EP or some other extended choice from a v3+ EP.
Paul Long Smith Micro Software, Inc.
Please send E-mail to contact@imtc.org mailto:contact@imtc.org to subscribe or unsubscribe from this list
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com