H.GCP draft uploaded

Mike Buckley mikebuckley at ATTMAIL.COM
Wed Apr 14 22:03:31 EDT 1999


I don't know whether this is the right place to comment on the Draft.  I have also
copied some of these comments to the megaco list.

I would like to see the use of SDP between the MGC and MG added to the
issues list.  My understanding is that the symantics and syntax of SDP are
different from H.245OLC.  Use of SDP in H.gcp will therefore involve a reordering
of the information sent in H.245 between endpoints.  This will add transcoding
complexity and latency.  In addition, all the features of H.245 I believe cannot be
presently supported in SDP.  For maximum efficiency and flexibility therefore
I think the mechanism used to convey capabilities should mirror the semantics
and syntax of H.245OLC.  I don't believe there is any extra overhead in
adopting this approach over SDP.  The coding used may be different from PER or

I think this also fits in with the list of H.gcp requirements where it is stated that
all the features of H.245 should be supported.


____________________ Begin Original Message
Date: Tue Apr 13 08:57:37 -0400 1999
From: internet!VIDEOSERVER.COM!bhill (Bryan Hill)
Subject: H.GCP draft uploaded
Content-Type: Text
Content-Length: 367

Mr. Okubo,
Please find a version of HGCP.doc and HGCP.zip that I have uploaded into the
ptel incoming site.  These are drafts of the contribution I am preparing for

Best Regards,
Bryan Hill
Bryan Hill
VideoServer Inc.
(781) 505-2159
bhill at videoserver.com <mailto:bhill at videoserver.com>

More information about the sg16-avd mailing list