caller ID and implementer's guide

Pete Cordell pete.cordell at BTINTERNET.COM
Tue May 18 05:16:02 EDT 1999


Dear All,

One solution to the version number paradox might work in the gatekeeper
routed mode.  An endpoint can find out during registration and prior to
sending SETUP the version number of the gatekeeper .  Based on the version
of the GK, an endpoint can decide whether to send presentation restricted
information to the GK.  If the remote endpoint, or the next 'routing entity'
is also registered with the GK, it will know its the version.  The GK could
remove the IE based on this information.

On a wider scale, this also requires such information to be included in
Annex G.  Is it?

Pete

=============================================
Pete Cordell
pete.cordell at btinternet.com
=============================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Long <Plong at SMITHMICRO.COM>
To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM <ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM>
Date: 14 May 1999 17:12
Subject: Re: caller ID and implementer's guide


>Randy,
>
>I agree, it has gone on too long, but... :-)
>
>Exactly, you've made my point for me!
>
>1.      One cannot send SETUP to a v1 or v2 EP with the octet-3 extension
bit
>of calling party number set to 0, because H.225.0 v1 and v2 says that it
shall
>be set to 1.
>
>2.      An H.323 entity cannot know (through in-band means) the version of
the
>destination EP before it sends SETUP.
>
>3.      Therefore, an entity can never send SETUP to an EP with the
extension
>bit set to 0 and octet 3a present.
>
>I don't know how to make it any clearer. Either nobody understands what I'm
>saying, or they do but really really REALLY want to use octet 3a "the way
God
>intended it to be used" :-) regardless of whether it violates some
revisions
>of H.225.0 and risks breaking compliant implementations. I believe the
latter
>is the case, but nobody wants to admit it.
>
>Paul Long
>Smith Micro Software, Inc.
>
>        -----Original Message-----
>        From:   Wuerfel, Randy P [SMTP:Randy.P.Wuerfel at ICN.SIEMENS.COM]
>        Sent:   Friday, May 14, 1999 10:18 AM
>        To:     ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
>        Subject:        Re: caller ID and implementer's guide
>
>        Perhaps this discussion has gone on too long, however I just wanted
to
>point
>        out that when Paul uses the phrase "an EP cannot send a SETUP
message
>to a
>        v1 or v2 EP ...", the phrase has no meaning (at least to me).  We
>support
>        users (people!) on our H.323 system that register with a GK.  The
>users are
>        mobile, and can thus register from any EP.  Thus, when I initiate a
>call, my
>        ARQ indicates a destinationInfo alias address of a user that may at
>that
>        moment be using any type of an EP.  Since my EP doesn't attempt to
>match a
>        transport address with an EP type (which would be a triviality
>anyway), I
>        have no idea of the EP type (v1, v2 or in the future v3) when I
send
>the
>        Setup message.
>
>        Don't I need an H.225.0 message returned from the destination EP
>before I
>        can determine its type?
>
>        Please consider the proposals that Karl Klaghofer has made to
resolve
>this
>        issue in Santiago.
>
>        ==========================================================
>        Randy Wuerfel
>        IP/Data Networks Development
>        Unisphere Solutions, Inc.               E-mail:
>        Randy.P.Wuerfel at icn.siemens.com
>        4900 Old Ironsides Drive                Fax: (408) 492-4666
>        M/S 200                         Tel: (408) 492-4375
>        P.O. Box 58075
>        Santa Clara, CA 95052-8075
>
>



More information about the sg16-avd mailing list