Hi Francois,

Are you saying that even if the OID hierarchy is underneath ITU H 225, it is still not advisable to enumerate non-ITU variants? I am not very knowledgeable about OID manners so I didn't realize this is frowned upon.

No, I'm saying the current OID for ISUP refers specifically to an ITU-T Recomendation, not the concept of "ISUP" (the OID is owned by ITU). To refer to, lets say, an ANSI version would require an ANSI OID.

Regarding variants for QSIG, I suppose you could have a complicated OID hierarchy underneath Annex M (1) that lists the version for each functional area (basic call, generic protocol, supp services, etc). There's no reason the hierarchy can't be different underneath each Annex M protocol, is there?

Yeah. So this seems to be too complicated, which is why we just say "QSIG".

My original concern was for ISUP - I take it the ability to discriminate version(s) is important for QSIG as well?

I don't think it is as important since most implementation have already converged to the ISO standard