Dear Jim,

all the following comments concern the H.235 white paper on the reflector. I tried to check the remaining stuff very quickly in the document and found the following items:

1. Page 7: goal no. 7 should end with H.235. 2. page 12: device is missing in the sentence ... not simply the physical device. 3. page 14: Section 6.6 does not mention that MCUs as well as intermediate GW/GKs are considered as trusted elements. Thus, the reference in section 9.1 is misleading and should point at least to section 3 in the appendix A instead. Why don't you include that section also to section 6.6? 4. Page 17: Section 10.2: Headline should read Diffie-... instead of Diffe. 5. Page 17: Section 10.2: Figure A: the request is missing the SeqNum and should look like ... XOR randomb XOR SeqNum ... 6. page 19: Section 10.3.4: I would change exchanged to assigned in the 2nd sentence with would read then: This protocol is based on ISO 9798-3, (5.2.1), it is assumed that an identifier and associated certificate are assigned during subscription. 7. page 19: Section 10.3.4: The figure should allow also optional certificate exchange. 8. Page 22: In AuthenticationMechanism one-way has to be deleted in the comment - Diffie-Hellman. 9. certificate key protection stuff within H.245 seems not to be complete, this needs some more inspections.....

Martin.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- | Dipl.-Inf. Phone: +49 89 636-46201 | Martin Euchner Fax : +49 89 636-48000 | Siemens AG | ZT IK 3 e-mail: Martin.Euchner@mchp.siemens.de | | Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 | 81730 Muenchen | __________________ | Germany -----------------------------------------------------------------------