e164 vs. partyNumber aliases

Pratima Shah shahp at AGCS.COM
Wed Apr 14 16:02:14 EDT 1999


Hi Bob,

AliasAddress is a CHOICE so either one (e164 or partNumber) can be selected by
the endpoint.  Unless H.323 is modified.

Pratima Shah

Callaghan, Robert wrote:

> Paul,
>
> It may be proper for to have the terminal parse the user dialed number and
> place the structured results in the partyNumber.  And then to also place the
> user dialed number in the E164 address.  This would give the best possible
> results.  However, H.323 should be modified to require the use of
> partyNumber first, if present, and use E164 alias.
>
> Bob
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Robert Callaghan
> Siemens Information & Communication Networks
> Tel: +1.561.997.3756    Fax: +1.561.997.3403
> Email:  Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Long [mailto:Plong at SMITHMICRO.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 1:57 PM
> To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> Subject: Re: e164 vs. partyNumber aliases
>
> Okay, but what is the status of the e164 alias? For example, if a user
> enters
> a "telephone number" at a v1 EP, it must be provided as an e164 alias. Will
> all other entities continue to recognize this as a telephone number? Now if
> a
> user does the same thing at a v2 EP, can the number be provided as an e164
> alias _or_ a partyNumber? Will all entities continue to support both types
> of
> aliases, or is e164 deprecated as of v2? As an EP vendor, I'd really hate to
> require the user to indicate whether the number they just entered is an
> "e164
> alias" or a "party number." Yucko... Maybe, just to be safe, the number
> should
> be provided in both forms, but I think some entities get confused when
> confronted with multiple aliases, or at least the semantics of such a thing
> is
> ambiguous.
>
> Paul Long
> Smith Micro Software, Inc.
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From:   Callaghan, Robert [SMTP:Robert.Callaghan at ICN.SIEMENS.COM]
>         Sent:   Wednesday, April 14, 1999 12:14 PM
>         To:     ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
>         Subject:        Re: e164 vs. partyNumber aliases
>
>         Paul,
>
>         The E164 alias, in use, is the user dialed number not a structured
> E.164
>         address.  The partyNumber is the structured E.164 or Private Number.
>
>         Bob
>
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------
>         Robert Callaghan
>         Siemens Information & Communication Networks
>         Tel: +1.561.997.3756    Fax: +1.561.997.3403
>         Email:  Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Paul Long [mailto:Plong at SMITHMICRO.COM]
>         Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 12:38 PM
>         To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
>         Subject: e164 vs. partyNumber aliases
>
>         What is the difference between an e164 alias and a partyNumber
> alias?
> Was
>         e164
>         found lacking, and does partyNumber now supercede it? Are we
> supposed
> to
>         stop
>         using e164? If not, how do we decide which form to use?
>
>         Paul Long
>         Smith Micro Software, Inc.



--
===============================================================
Pratima Shah               AG Communication Systems
Phone:  (602) 581-4710    -A subsidiary of Lucent Technologies-
Fax:    (602) 581-4636     2500 West Utopia Road
Email:  shahp at agcs.com     Phoenix AZ 85027
===============================================================
        "Expand The Power Of Your Network"
               http://www.agcs.com
                    =========



More information about the sg16-avd mailing list