FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: "cathy jiang" <jiangxiaolin@mail.ritt.com.cn> To: "patrick.luthi" <patrick.luthi@tandberg.net>; "paulej" <paulej@packetizer.com> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 11:37 AM Subject: response from editor of H.PROXY

Dear all,

This following text is our answer to the questions raised in TD-14,which Mr.Luthi have addressed this afternoon. I also attached the history documents in this mail, pls check it out. Q&A (1)Provide a justification document for why we should move forward with H.proxy given that we have solutions already, including, but not limited to, information on scalability as compared to other solutions; and

A:we already have 2 documents (D-023/D-088) submitted in SG16 November Plenary meeting in the year of 2004, which are also attached in this email for your references. These two documents are broadly consented and approved by the experts in Q5/16 that it should start a WI on proxy aided NAT/FW traversal scheme. D88 discussed the necessities of proxy-aided NAT/FW traversal scheme and D23 is all about the feasiblity of PROXY.I think these two documents can explain well about question(1). but, if you still feel that these are still insufficient to answer your question,pls let me know what kind of information specific I should supply to you and to other experts related.

(2)Provide clear guidance as to which solution is the right solution in certain environments in another document in the aforementioned document; and

A: We already have TP.HNFT and from the outcome of this Q5 session, we both should append this kind of information into our documents.

(3)Deliver a revised draft that properly and adequately addresses the questions raised during the meeting and clearly explains how the procedures shall work, including, but not limited to, how endpoints communicate with the UTS/UTC and/or proxies on either end, where proxy devices exist, what functionality exists in each component, how the UDP tunnel works in exacting detail so that there is no ambiguity and that it can be properly implemented, and how the various components interact to move packets through the UDP tunnel.

A: With regard to any comments towards section8.5(proxy in public network with xtc and xts), i think we should leave it until the decision on how to deal with this section have been made.if it should be removed from this document, then question (3) could be out of the question.