Apparently, I misunderstood what you were looking for. Unless I hear any objections, I will add that function to ICAS for the next meeting.
Of course, this does nothing for the BCAS spec -- I assume we will need the same change there? This will require an amendment to H.248.25... I don't think this kind of change will be acceptable as an IG change.
Comments?
Kevin
-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Voith [mailto:Thomas.Voith@alcatel.de] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Kevin [NCRTP:3Z40:EXCH] Cc: Christian Groves; megaco@ietf.org; ITU-SG16@external.cisco.com Subject: Re: [Megaco] Re: Event descriptor handling for static logic interfaces like CAS
Hello Kevin
What you mean is a general behavior, but MGC can not control it. This does not solve the problem which I ment.
To make it easy I take the example for 'al/on al/of':
The MGC want to be notified for 'al/on' and 'al/of'. MGC assumes that the line is in state 'al/on'.
With Events{al/on{strict='exact'},al/of{strict='state'},....} the MGC do not get a Notify for al/on, because it is not necessary.
When MGC then knows with the next notify, that the line is off-hook, it send perhaps a new EventsDescriptor containing the DigitMap, but now with Events{al/on{strict='state'},al/of{strict='exact'},....} This avoids again not needed Notify's.
Same applies for CAS, where you have more states. With this mechanism you can update the EventsDescriptor for other things bind to this termination like R2 register signalling without again a not needed Notify AND in addition all static events are detected, not only the good case next step.
Regards
Thomas
Kevin Boyle wrote:
Thomas,
The function you want already exists in the package. Each one of the line signalling events in both ICAS and BCAS have descriptions that contain the following:
The event is reported by the MG if either the timed transition to this line signal is detected or the line signal already exists.
This means that the strict=state behavior is already inherent in these events. I see no problem with this, and no need for a change to these packages.
Kevin
-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Voith [mailto:Thomas.Voith@alcatel.de] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 4:00 AM To: Christian Groves Cc: megaco@ietf.org; ITU-SG16@external.cisco.com Subject: Re: [Megaco] Re: Event descriptor handling for static logic interfaces like CAS
Hello Christian
I want both,
- strict parameter for CAS Line signals and in future for all
'static'signalling interfaces.
- optionally a default strict="state" to shorten the Events Descriptor
In my opinion, this should be used for all 'static' signalling interfaces. With 'static' I mean that this interface has always a state, when MG receives an EventsDescriptor from MGC. For synchronizing the states from MGC with MG the strict mechanism is very useful. Doing the same with EventBuffer, Embedded Descriptor
is much more complex and increases extreme with the number of possible states on the interface.
Note: This 'strict' parameter is just used by MG to determine, whether a
Notify
for the existing state on the interface has to be sent or not. Further on normal event handling applies. This approach has the advantage, that EventBuffer and Embedded can
still be used
in addition.For all 'dynamic' events like pulses, DTMF, SPCM, normal event handling applies.
Best regards
Thomas
Christian Groves wrote:
Hello Thomas,
Are you wanting a general purpose mechanism such as the off-hook one or do you just want the default stated for H.248.26 and H.246.ICASC?
Kevin Boyle is the editor of these he may have some opinion on this.
Its always possible to make amendments to existing recommendations. Bring in a contribution for consideration to SG16 or propose a detailed solution on the Megaco list for experts to review. If they are agreeable then the change will be added.
Regards, Christian
Thomas Voith wrote:
Dear list-members,
H.248.26 and in H.248.ICAS I miss a feature, which has been used already for On-Hook, Off-Hook the 'strict' parameter.
All interfaces, which have static states, should implement such a mechanism.
The problem is that the EventsDescriptor EventBufferDescriptor or an embedded EventsDescriptor may discard events, if the newly received or replacing Event Descriptor does not match the event.
In the Megaco Secnarios, always just the good case is shown.
e.g. a static interface with 4 logical incoming events ( S1,S2,S3,S4) would then set the EventsDescripror like:
MGC guess the MG is in state i1, no Notify will be sent by MG, when state of interface is still i1.
Events { S1{strict="exact"},S2{strict="state"},S3{strict="state"},S4{strict =" state"} }
( Note: in case "state" is the default, then EventsDescriptor could be shorter)
The events descriptor remains active, after Notification is sent. The strict parameter avoids unnecessary Notifications for the already by MGC known state.
This mechanism would be very simple and avoids lost of any events, which is strong required for signalling interfaces on MG transferred via H.248 to an MGC.
For a better illustration I have attached a Excel-File containing a simple scenario.
So my question/proposal is:
- Is it possible to extend the existing static state interfacepackages
like H.248.26 with this
strict feature?
- If not, can I get this functionality otherwise ?
Kind regards
Thomas Voith
Megaco mailing list Megaco@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
-- _______________________________________________________________ _ V | Thomas Voith +---------------+ | Dept. VS/EAC2 [Systems] | A L C A T E L | | FL/2/50 +---------------+ | | Tel: +49 711 821-40293 | Alcanet: 259-40293 Alcatel SEL AG | Fax: +49 711 821-40211 Fixed Networks Division | Lorenzstr. 10 | mailto:Thomas.Voith@alcatel.de D-70435 Stuttgart, Germany | _______________________________________________________________
Megaco mailing list Megaco@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco