Hi, All:

Let me add a little more.

The term "third party" indicates that it is doing something on behalf of the "first" party and is NOT involved at all for anything.

However, in the case of IWF, the transport address of the IWF is being used for all aliases that are being registered. In true sense, IWF becomes a party "indirectly" for all aliases.

As Chris mentioned, the term "third party" has not been used by the H.323 GW (H.323v2) for the registration although it is registering many alias addresses to the H.323 GK.

However, in SIP, the "third party" registration has been clearly defined, and third party does not get involved once the registration is over. I believe that H.323v2 does not define the third party registration as it is supposed to be.

Hope this will clarify blending the views of both Chris and Charles.

Best regards, Radhika

-----Original Message----- From: Agboh, Charles [mailto:Charles.Agboh@GTS.COM] Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 11:56 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Third party registration/group registration

sorry,...

Hi Chris,

My undstanding of "third-party" registration is the same as yours. But, in some applications a registration by the IWF may not be on its own behalf. H.323v4 provides this feature (a way to bypass the UDP packet size limitation) for this same reason.

Does it make sense to have this?, If no, then why not?

SupportedProtocols ::= CHOICE { nonStandardData NonStandardParameter, h310 H310Caps, h320 H320Caps, h321 H321Caps, h322 H322Caps, h323 H323Caps, h324 H324Caps, voice ......., SIP SIPCaps }

regards,

charles -----Original Message----- From: Chris Wayman Purvis [mailto:cwp@isdn-comms.co.uk] Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 10:41 AM To: Agboh, Charles Cc: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com Subject: Re: Third party registration/group registration

Charles,

Wrong in my opinion, but I would hope other experts would express their opinions too! The problem is I'm not sure whether this is a question of understanding or of detailed definition of the phrase "third party" in this context. My understanding of the phrase "third party registration" would be one H.323 entity registering at a gatekeeper on behalf of other H.323 entities. My understanding of the word "registration" of this context is that it can only apply to H.323 entities. In this context the IWF can be considered to be at the extreme edge of the H.323 network, so any "registration" it does is on its own behalf. Maybe what you actually want is some equivalent to the supportedPrefixes that arrived in version 2, for SIP gateways. Whatever we agree you want, though, I think it is worth trying to reach some consensus among experts in this group as to what the phrase "third party" means in this context - as your understanding and mine are clearly in disagreement.

Regards, Chris

"Agboh, Charles" wrote:

Chris,

There are applications where an IWF can register an EP from one domain

into

another. This allows automatic visibility of EP from one domain from another. In this case the IWF is registering not only itself but other

EPs.

For this scenario, the third-party entity is the IWF, right?

regards,

charles

-- Dr Chris Purvis -- Development Manager ISDN Communications Ltd, The Stable Block, Ronans, Chavey Down Road Winkfield Row, Berkshire. RG42 6LY ENGLAND Phone: +44 1344 899 007 Fax: +44 1344 899 001

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to listserv@mailbag.intel.com