Reference which version of Q.931, etc.?
On of the open issues is the correct version of Q.931 should be referenced in H.225.0 and H.323. When v3 was decided, they was updated to reference Q.931(1998) instead of Q.931(1993). This is a discussion of the impact of this change and how to resolve the problems. - H.225.0 and Q.931 include a semi-infinite number of references to table, figures and sections of Q.931. V3 still references the 1993 items even though the parent reference is 1998. It is possible to update all the detailed references or to return the parent reference to 1993. Either way they must be consistent. - Q.931(1998) introduced a number of changes from the 1993 version. If we update v4 to consistently reference 1998, do we want to automatically include all the changes in Q.931? - If we do accept, by default, the changes to Q.931, do any of these changes conflict with the ASN.1 coding that we use? If so, how is this resolved? However this problem is resolved, it must be consistent within H.323v4 and H.225.0v4. Bob ------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Callaghan Siemens Enterprise Networks Tel: +1.561.923.1756 Fax: +1.561.923.1403 Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
Hi Bob, I just want to remind everyone that we agreed in Osaka not to update the Q.931 cross-references, but instead to revert the parent reference to Q.931 (1993) so we (I) wouldn't have to update and verify all of the table references, etc. However, when I was about to make that change, I noticed that there were references to 1998 versions of other standards (Q.932, Q.850) also, and I was concerned that these other standards might reference the 1998 version of Q.931, so we would have a synchronization problem of another kind. That's why I didn't make the change, and noted this as an open issue. I also have some concern about referencing a standard that is no longer published. My preference would be to leave the parent reference as Q.931 (1998) and update the semi-infinite number of cross-references. I agree the inconsistency has to be corrected. BTW, this also existed in v2. - Rich "Callaghan, Robert" wrote:
On of the open issues is the correct version of Q.931 should be referenced in H.225.0 and H.323. When v3 was decided, they was updated to reference Q.931(1998) instead of Q.931(1993). This is a discussion of the impact of this change and how to resolve the problems.
- H.225.0 and Q.931 include a semi-infinite number of references to table, figures and sections of Q.931. V3 still references the 1993 items even though the parent reference is 1998. It is possible to update all the detailed references or to return the parent reference to 1993. Either way they must be consistent.
- Q.931(1998) introduced a number of changes from the 1993 version. If we update v4 to consistently reference 1998, do we want to automatically include all the changes in Q.931?
- If we do accept, by default, the changes to Q.931, do any of these changes conflict with the ASN.1 coding that we use? If so, how is this resolved?
However this problem is resolved, it must be consistent within H.323v4 and H.225.0v4.
Bob
------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Callaghan Siemens Enterprise Networks Tel: +1.561.923.1756 Fax: +1.561.923.1403 Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com ------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard K. Bowen Cisco Systems, Inc. VoIP Session Protocols Research Triangle Park, NC, USA -------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
Hi Bob,
I just want to remind everyone that we agreed in Osaka not to update the Q.931 cross-references, but instead to revert the parent reference to Q.931 (1993) so we (I) wouldn't have to update and verify all of the table references, etc.
However, when I was about to make that change, I noticed that there were references to 1998 versions of other standards (Q.932, Q.850) also, and I was concerned that these other standards might reference the 1998 version of Q.931, so we would have a synchronization problem of another kind. That's why I didn't make the change, and noted this as an open issue.
I also have some concern about referencing a standard that is no longer published.
My preference would be to leave the parent reference as Q.931 (1998) and update the semi-infinite number of cross-references.
I agree the inconsistency has to be corrected. BTW, this also existed in v2.
- Rich
"Callaghan, Robert" wrote:
On of the open issues is the correct version of Q.931 should be
referenced
in H.225.0 and H.323. When v3 was decided, they was updated to reference Q.931(1998) instead of Q.931(1993). This is a discussion of the impact of this change and how to resolve the problems.
- H.225.0 and Q.931 include a semi-infinite number of references to
Rich, Hmmm... editors in disagreement? Perhaps I should read before I post :-). OK, if Rich is willing to make this change, I suppose I can do the same for H.323, though I would guess it is much less work. I took a quick scan and there do not appear to be any issues in H.323, per se, that require attention in order to make this change. Is anyone aware of any issues? Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rich Bowen" <rkbowen@CISCO.COM> To: <ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 11:07 PM Subject: Re: Reference which version of Q.931, etc.? table,
figures and sections of Q.931. V3 still references the 1993 items even though the parent reference is 1998. It is possible to update all the detailed references or to return the parent reference to 1993. Either way they must be consistent.
- Q.931(1998) introduced a number of changes from the 1993 version. If we update v4 to consistently reference 1998, do we want to automatically include all the changes in Q.931?
- If we do accept, by default, the changes to Q.931, do any of these changes conflict with the ASN.1 coding that we use? If so, how is this resolved?
However this problem is resolved, it must be consistent within H.323v4 and H.225.0v4.
Bob
------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Callaghan Siemens Enterprise Networks Tel: +1.561.923.1756 Fax: +1.561.923.1403 Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com ------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard K. Bowen Cisco Systems, Inc. VoIP Session Protocols Research Triangle Park, NC, USA --------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
Bob, My understanding was that everyone agreed to reference the 1993 version. The H.323v3 document that I submitted to the TSB referred to the 1993 version. However, I noticed that during editing, they changed that to 1998 :-) H.225.0v3, however, did reference Q.931 (1998), but I do not believe that an effort was made to align the references into that document. In reality, I believe we have always followed the 1993 version. I would like to consider your previous suggestion and just incorporate the parts of Q.931 that we need into H.323 and H.225.0 and remove all references. However, that's more than we can do for H.323v4 now. For now, I'd like to leave the references at 1993. What's your opinion? Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Callaghan, Robert" <Robert.Callaghan@ICN.SIEMENS.COM> To: <ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 4:10 PM Subject: Reference which version of Q.931, etc.?
On of the open issues is the correct version of Q.931 should be referenced in H.225.0 and H.323. When v3 was decided, they was updated to reference Q.931(1998) instead of Q.931(1993). This is a discussion of the impact of this change and how to resolve the problems.
- H.225.0 and Q.931 include a semi-infinite number of references to table, figures and sections of Q.931. V3 still references the 1993 items even though the parent reference is 1998. It is possible to update all the detailed references or to return the parent reference to 1993. Either way they must be consistent.
- Q.931(1998) introduced a number of changes from the 1993 version. If we update v4 to consistently reference 1998, do we want to automatically include all the changes in Q.931?
- If we do accept, by default, the changes to Q.931, do any of these changes conflict with the ASN.1 coding that we use? If so, how is this resolved?
However this problem is resolved, it must be consistent within H.323v4 and H.225.0v4.
Bob
------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Callaghan Siemens Enterprise Networks Tel: +1.561.923.1756 Fax: +1.561.923.1403 Email: Robert.Callaghan@ICN.Siemens.com ------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com
participants (3)
-
Callaghan, Robert -
Paul E. Jones -
Rich Bowen