AW: Doubt about CallLinkage structure in IRR message

22 Mar 2000

      I agree with Aseem.

D.392 from Geneva had this new field correctly qualified as OPTIONAL in any
message it appears (including IRR).

Besides H.323v3 Impl Guide, this error slipped in during editing phase also
to H.225.0v4 and needs to be corrected here as well.

Regards,
Karl Klaghofer
Siemens
...
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von:  Paul E. Jones [SMTP:paul.jones@ties.itu.int]
Gesendet am:  Mittwoch, 22. März 2000 03:23
An:   Aseem Agarwal
Cc:   h323implementors@imtc.org; ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com; Klaghofer
Karl ICN SIB NL D1
Betreff:      Re: Doubt about CallLinkage structure in IRR message
Aseem,
That is definitely a typographical error-- the callLinkage field should
definitely contain the OPTIONAL modifier.  I will make a correction to
this
and make mention of it at the next Question 13/16 meeting.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Best Regards,
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aseem Agarwal" <aseem@trillium.com>
To: <paul.jones@ties.itu.int>
Cc: <h323implementors@imtc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 7:15 PM
Subject: Doubt about CallLinkage structure in IRR message
...
Hi Paul,
  Implementers' Guide for H.225V3 (H323V3_IG_0002.zip) has added
  CallLinkage structure to perCallInfo in IRR as a mandatory IE.
Since the Call Linkage is an optional feature, it should be an
  optional IE. Is this a mistake or there is a reason behind it?
  Kindly clarify.
thanks,
aseem@trillium.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
------------------------------
Please send E-mail to contact@imtc.org <mailto:contact@imtc.org>  to
subscribe or unsubscribe from this list
------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

<Karl Klaghofer>

Rich Bowen

tags

participants (2)