Hi, Paul and All:

May be many people did the similar or the same thing. Who knows what we can call it - "invention" or "prior art."

The bottom line is that we have contributions in the IETF in the public domain for the SIP-H.323 Interworking, and these contributions are theirs. We cannot use their proposed solutions unless they permit. However, if there are people who claim that they did it before those contributions, they need to speak out now bringing their contributions. Unless they do, we have no way of knowing this.

We have also seen Chip Sharp's and Scott Bradner's email. Their emails further clarify the process of the both organizations: IETF and ITU.

This is one of the problems that we need to sort out. One way of doing is that we can create an Informational RFC as all authors of those contributions have agreed to do so. We can then see whether this Informational RFC can be made a standard one as stated below:

1. To see whether this can be made a standard track RFC in the IETF or

2. To use the Informational/Standardtrack RFC to the SG16 to make a formal standard in the SG16 (if the normative reference cannot be used for the Informational RFC, we have to find out some other ways how we can do this [e.g., SIP WG Chair can request that individuals be appointed formal ISOC/IETF representatives to the ITU-T])

To meet the backward compatibility (e.g., Roni mentioned it) and other concerns, we can work out this as well (both in the Informational/Standardtrack RFC/IETF and SG16).

Considering all OPTIONs, the above two steps seem to be the most reasonable way to proceed.

Best regards, Radhika R. Roy

-----Original Message----- From: Paul E. Jones [SMTP:paulej@PACKETIZER.COM] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 1:35 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: H.323 Annex O

Radhika,

...

The key is that the SG16 cannot use the interworking solution that has

been

...

"invented" by the other companies or institutions without their consent

and

...

participation. I personally feel very strongly that the SG16 cannot not "invent" a NEW interworking solution of its own that will NOT include

the

...

solutions proposed by others in the IETF.

I like this one... I've already built a SIP/H.323 interworking device-- a long time ago, before any group in any standards organization was formed to work on the issue. I would question whether such an IWF could even be called an "invention", as it is certainly "prior art".

Paul

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