-----Original Message----- From: Boaz Michaely [SMTP:Boaz_Michaely@VOCALTEC.COM] Sent: 03 June 1999 13:46 To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: H.GCP is about gateway recomposition, not decomposition..

Dear Brian, I am documenting a piece on the "minimal interoperability" issue, which I will forward to you next week. (if there is interest I can post it to the list)

The basic idea is that while the motivation for H.GCP was gateway decomposition, the actual standard deals with composing rather than decomposing.

Thus I propose to introduce some terms, such as "composite gateway", while adhering to H.323 current definitions, and work on the call setup procedures, closely following the actual H.323 text. This will lead to

Sorry about that attachement. (don't you love NOTES too ?) Hope this works : (See attached file: H.GCP composition.doc) - Boaz "John Talbot" <jptalbot@nortelnetworks.com> on 03/06/99 07:08:47 PM To: Boaz Michaely cc: Subject: RE: H.GCP is about gateway recomposition, not decomposition.. Michaely, Did you realy mean to send the image of the icon of the document rather than the document itself with your email? Anyway I read your document and have included my comments :-) <<pic10782.pcx>> Cheers John the

resolution of transfering call signalling between the MGC and the MG in the various compositions. One thought that crossed my mind was to explicitly deal with all the gateway categories that H.323 defines ( H.310 (H.320 on B-ISDN), H.320 (ISDN), H.321 (ATM), H.322 (GQOS-LAN), H.324 (GSTN), H.324M (Mobile), and V.70 (DSVD)).

We may also need to modify H.323v3, at least to some extent, in order to better cover gateway sub-components.

A sample of the text is attached (Word 97)

(Embedded image moved to file: pic10782.pcx)

Boaz.

Boaz Michaely Senior Program Manager, Advanced Technologies VocalTec Communications Ltd e-mail boaz@vocaltec.com Tel +972 (9) 970-7869