caller ID and implementer's guide
Paul Long
Plong at SMITHMICRO.COM
Thu May 6 16:59:14 EDT 1999
Glen,
Yes, this would definitely be a problem. As you know, 7.2.2.1/H.225.0v2 says,
"Information transfer capability (octet #3)
- The extension bit (bit 8) shall be set to '1'."
Our EP expects the remote entity to set it correctly. If it's not, we assume
that the SETUP is "bad" and clear the call by sending RELEASE COMPLETE.
This goes for all changes being considered: a new Recommendation revision can
augment and clarify but never modify the behavior defined by the previous
revision. There is so much development effort in the H.323 world that you
can't make a change simply because nobody responded to your query on the
reflector. Please do not risk breaking implementations by modifying the
Recommendation, no matter how obscure those modifications seem.
Paul Long
Smith Micro Software, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Freundlich [SMTP:ggf at LUCENT.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 3:11 PM
To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
Subject: caller ID and implementer's guide
At the Monterey meeting we discussed the possibility of an addition to
the Implementer's Guide to support caller ID features (APC-1527).
H.225.0 V2 (and V1) forbids the use of octet 3a in the Calling Party
Number IE (and also specifies that the octet 3 extension bit shall be
set to 1). The proposal calls for removing the restriction through the
Implementer's Guide. (See also the meeting report in APC-1554b.)
Fixing this brings up the possibility of interoperability problems
with
existing products. Please respond if you think this change will be a
problem. You can respond to me individually, rather than to the entire
list, if you prefer.
Thanks,
Glen
--
Glen Freundlich ggf at lucent.com
Lucent Technologies office: +1 303 538 2899
11900 N. Pecos fax: +1 303 538 3907
Westminster, Colorado 80234 USA
More information about the sg16-avd
mailing list