Hi, Paul and Jaakko:

Many thanks for the information.

Paul Guram: Please provide a well thought convention for the document number. For example, MTD.xxx would be given to diiferentiate from the reqular TDs. One request to you: Once a numbering convention is used, please try to stick to that rule (if we change the rule in the middle, it creates confusions as it happened last time).

Best regards, Radhika R. Roy AT&T

-----Original Message----- From: Jaakko Sundquist [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist@NOKIA.COM] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 9:01 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: [H.323Mobility:]

Hi Radhika et al,

There seems to be a subdirectory in the pictel-site for mobility. The URL is: ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/Mobility-adhoc/ . I suggest that we will put our contributions there. It would be nice to have some naming convention (such as the MTD-xxx scheme) for the documents. Maybe Paul should assign these numbers as he is now the moderator for the teleconferences...

• Jaakko Sundquist

            -----Original Message-----
            From:   EXT Roy, Radhika R, ALARC [mailto:rrroy@att.com]
            Sent:   Wednesday, February 23, 2000 3:34 PM
            To:     ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com
            Subject:        Re: [H.323Mobility:]
  
            Hi, Jaakko:
  
            I agree with your reply that was also reflected in my
  

earlier email.

            I have a question to you and Paul Guram: Have you guys

decided where the incoming contributions for the Ad Hoc group to be sent and where the URL would be for accessing to that website? If it is so, please let all of us know soon.

            Paul Guram: Are you close to decide the meeting date and

time as well?

            Best regards,
            Radhika R. Roy


            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: Jaakko Sundquist [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist@NOKIA.COM]
            > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 3:37 AM
            > To:   ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
            > Subject:      [H.323Mobility:]
            >
            > Hi all,
            >
            > I'm sending here the documents related to H.323 Annex H

that were > accomplished in the Geneva meeting by the ad hoc mobility group. Included > are the draft Annex H, the Terms of Reference for it as well as the > meeting > minutes (quite short) of the ad hoc group meetings in Geneva. > > As Mr. Tran pointed out the location area had been left to the VLF-section > of the draft annex. This is my mistake and I apologize for any confusion > it > has created. I did not, however, take it off from the document I am > sending > here, this is the document that was produced as a TD in Geneva, but I will > remove the location area from the subsequent versions of the draft annex. > As for the TMSI, etc. concepts, in my view it is quite unnecessary to > argue > about these, the TMSI is already included in the proposed new alias > address > type: UIM. Many of these concepts are, as I understand, already needed in > H.246 Annex E, which addresses one scenario of the mobility problem. I > would > see the VLR functionality of the H.246 Annex E IWF as really the VLF we > have > defined as a new mobility functional entity, thus the identifiers TMSI, > etc. > would be needed in the VLF at least in some cases. However, it might be > suitable to indicate that all of the identifiers mentioned in the VLF (and > other) section(s) are not mandatory. > > <<GenevaMobility.zip>> > > - Jaakko Sundquist > ------------------------------------------------------- > In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. > Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of > worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, > sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: > it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort. > ------------------------------------------------------- << File: > GenevaMobility.zip >>