Re: H.320 to H.323 Gateways: Will They Decompose?
Tom,
Without going into specific product plans, it is clear that for deployments that want to support both voice AND H.320 - deployment of "video only" gateways does not make any sense, and the same gateway needs to support both functions.
So, if voice will opt for decomposition, it should find a way to accommodate the video/data side. BTW - H.324 "died" because there was no real application/network that supported it well. It seems to me that in the new networks (e.g. ADSL or Cable or wireless local loop) it might still be useful. Should we support it in Megacop?
Ami
-----Original Message----- From: Tom-PT Taylor [SMTP:taylor@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Friday, April 09, 1999 9:57 PM To: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com Subject: H.320 to H.323 Gateways: Will They Decompose?
This is addressed to the experts of Study Group 16, but has impact on the priorities of work both for Megaco and for H.GCP. The question, which I raised obliquely in a previous exchange on co-location of H.245 signalling with the Media Gateway function, is whether any vendor will actually create a decomposed H.320-to-H.323 Gateway. If not, we can stop worrying about how to accommodate H.320 in the Media Gateway control protocol.
Tom Taylor E-mail: taylor@nortelnetworks.com (internally Tom-PT Taylor) Tel.: +1 613 736 0961 (ESN 396-1490) FAX: same number by prior arrangement (manual answer).
G'Day Ami and Tom,
There has been some initial disucssion in the 3rd generation mobile projects (ie.UMTS) regarding the usage of H.324 therefore I think its too early to preclude H.324 from MEGACOP discussion. So I think that it should definately be supported in the scope of MEGACOP.
Cheers, Christian
Ami Amir wrote:
Tom,
Without going into specific product plans, it is clear that for deployments that want to support both voice AND H.320 - deployment of "video only" gateways does not make any sense, and the same gateway needs to support both functions.
So, if voice will opt for decomposition, it should find a way to accommodate the video/data side. BTW - H.324 "died" because there was no real application/network that supported it well. It seems to me that in the new networks (e.g. ADSL or Cable or wireless local loop) it might still be useful. Should we support it in Megacop?
Ami
-----Original Message----- From: Tom-PT Taylor [SMTP:taylor@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Friday, April 09, 1999 9:57 PM To: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com Subject: H.320 to H.323 Gateways: Will They Decompose?
This is addressed to the experts of Study Group 16, but has impact on the priorities of work both for Megaco and for H.GCP. The question, which I raised obliquely in a previous exchange on co-location of H.245 signalling with the Media Gateway function, is whether any vendor will actually create a decomposed H.320-to-H.323 Gateway. If not, we can stop worrying about how to accommodate H.320 in the Media Gateway control protocol.
Tom Taylor E-mail: taylor@nortelnetworks.com (internally Tom-PT Taylor) Tel.: +1 613 736 0961 (ESN 396-1490) FAX: same number by prior arrangement (manual answer).
participants (2)
-
Ami Amir -
Christian Groves