[Robustness] H.225 & H.245 state info

[Paul E. Jones]

Karl,

I agree with your comments here and I have added it to the H.323v3
Implementers Guide to be presented at the upcoming meeting.  It is obviously
an omission and should be there.

Thanks for pointing it out.

Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: "<Karl Klaghofer>" <Karl.Klaghofer at ICN.SIEMENS.DE>
To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 6:13 AM
Subject: Missing FastConnectRefused flag in PROGRESS message


> In the Geneva 2/2000 meeting, we introduced the fastConnectRefused flag
into
> some H.225.0v3 (Imple Guide) and v4 messages.  We forgot to put this new
> field into PROGRESS as well (especially required for GWY interworking).
> Otherwise, it is difficult to comply with the following statement:
>         ".....fastConnectRefused - A called endpoint should return this
> element in any message up to and including the Connect message when
> establishing a call to indicate that it refuses the Fast Connect
procedure.
> ....."
>
> Note: The original contribution D.459 from Orit proposed to add this flag
to
> the H323-UU-PDU structure, which would have enabled the flag for PROGRESS
as
> well as for any other message. I guess we changed this in order to only
put
> the flag to the messages where it makes sense (which should be backwards
> messages) and missed the PROGRESS.
>
> I consider this an an error and propose that the editor should add the
> missing field to PROGRESS to the next updated draft of H.225.0v4 (I assume
> that no APC is required for Osaka for this ?).
> Is there a way to correct this also for H.323/H.225.0v3 ?
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Karl
> ------------------------------------------------
> Karl Klaghofer, Siemens AG, Dpmt. ICN SIB NL D1
> Hofmannstr. 51, D-81359 Munich, Germany
> Tel.: +49 89 722 31488, Fax.: +49 89 722 37629
> e-mail: karl.klaghofer at icn.siemens.de
>