I just took a look at the changes made to H.225.0v3 in Santiago. I noticed that whereas octet 3a of Calling Party Number in Bearer caps "Shall not be present" in H.225.0v1 and v2, it is allowed in v3! And this apparent oversight was not rectified in Berlin after discussion on this reflector. How will we now guarantee interoperability between v1, v2, and v3+ entities? What if some v1 or v2 entities were implemented according to the Recommendation and do not expect this octet to be present and indeed will fail through no fault of their own? Several alternatives were presented back in May. Why was the least interoperable solution kept?

Paul Long Smith Micro Software, Inc.