Problem in Connect Message in H.2250 V3

[Aseem Agarwal]

I feel that this definitely warrants a change in the next Implementor's
Guide in order to avoid any ambiguity.

aseem


>
> In looking at this again, I have to withdraw my previous comments below.
>
> H.225.0 specifies that the encoding of the elements shall follow Q.931.
> This would also imply the ordering, as H.225.0 does not specify a different
> ordering.  I was mistaken in saying that H.225.0 specifies the ordering-- it
> does not.
>
> I will have to concur with Guntram Diehl, who posted a similar comment, that
> the tables in H.225.0 do not dictate an ordering of the information elements
> and that the ordering is dictated by Q.931.
>
> Now the question is "how important is it that the tables in H.225.0 show the
> elements in order"?  Perhaps we should make this change to H.225.0v4.
> Aseem, do you feel that this warrants a change in the Implementers Guide?
>
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul E. Jones <paul.jones at ties.itu.int>
> To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Problem in Connect Message in H.2250 V3
>
>
> > Aseem,
> >
> > This may be true for Q.931, but H.225.0 modifies the related tables found
> in
> > Q.931.  H.225.0 suggests in section 7.2.2 that the encoding shall follow
> > rules in Q.931, but H.225.0 specifies the ordering.
> >
> > I see no problem with putting those fields at the end, especially
> > considering that inserting new IEs in the middle may be more difficult to
> > handle.
> >
> > It might be interesting to see what assumptions people have made.  Do
> > implementation expect an ordering?  Would they expect new elements to be
> > ordered numerically or at the end?
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Paul
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Aseem Agarwal <aseem at TRILLIUM.COM>
> > To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 5:43 PM
> > Subject: Problem in Connect Message in H.2250 V3
> >
> >
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > >  There is a problem in the additions made to Q.931 part of Connect
> > >  message in H.2250V3. Two new IEs have been added AFTER User-to-User IE.
> > >
> > >  The IE codes for the new IEs added are:
> > >  Connected Number    : 0x4c
> > >  Connected Subaddress: 0x4d
> > >
> > >  The IE code for User-to-User is 0x7e
> > >
> > >  According to Q.931 coding Rules [section: 4.5.1], the IEs in a message
> > >  should be in ascending order of their respective code values. These two
> > >  IEs should be added after Date/Time IE.
> > >
> > >  Comments ?
> > >
> > > aseem at trillium.com
> > >
> >
>