[sip-h323] SIP-H.323 interworking Requirements Draft

Paul E. Jones paulej at PACKETIZER.COM
Mon Aug 28 23:52:35 EDT 2000


FYI

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 10:41 PM
To: 'sip-h323 at egroups.com'; sip-h323 at egroups.com
Subject: RE: [sip-h323] SIP-H.323 interworking Requirements Draft


Hi, Henning:

I agree with you (please also see my response provided below).

Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy

-----Original Message-----
From: Henning Schulzrinne [mailto:schulzrinne at cs.columbia.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 12:12 PM
To: sip-h323 at egroups.com
Subject: Re: [sip-h323] SIP-H.323 interworking Requirements Draft




"Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO" wrote:
>
> Hi, Everyone:
>
> I have just returned from the ITU-T SG16 Q.13 (H.323) meeting where our
> SIP-H.323 Interworking requirement draft was also discussed.
>
> The Q.13 members have strongly recommended that we should consider H.323
> version 3 (instead of version 2) for our SIP-H.323 interworking work.

What practical difference does it make? Could you summarize the relevant
differences?

Presumably, a v3 terminal is going to interoperate with v2 terminals.
For the next year, at the very least, the only real implementation to
worry about is NetMeeting (v2, I assume).

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 10:32 PM
To: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO; sip-h323 at egroups.com
Subject: RE: [sip-h323] SIP-H.323 interworking Requirements Draft


Hi, Everyone:

Here is my view as stated below:

It is very difficult to find any vendor to support H.323 version 3.  Many
companies are now testing vendor implementations of H.323 version 2, and it
is also reported that multivendor interoperability at the version 2 level is
still problematic.  In many cases, no promise has been obtained from the
major vendors when they will support version 3.  It may be very nice to have
SIP/H.323 v3 interworking, but we think SIP/H.323 v2 interworking should
come first.

Considering all factors, I think that we should keep our first interworking
requirements to support H.323 version 2 as defined in the present draft
(while we may consider for H.323 version 3 in the future).

So, I recommend that we should make any changes in the present draft.

Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy
AT&T
+11 732 420 1580

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO [mailto:rrroy at att.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2000 10:32 PM
To: sip-h323 at egroups.com
Subject: [sip-h323] SIP-H.323 interworking Requirements Draft


Hi, Everyone:

I have just returned from the ITU-T SG16 Q.13 (H.323) meeting where our
SIP-H.323 Interworking requirement draft was also discussed.

The Q.13 members have strongly recommended that we should consider H.323
version 3 (instead of version 2) for our SIP-H.323 interworking work.

We would appreciate if you would kindly provide your comments on the point.

Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy
AT&T
+1 732 420 1580
rrroy at att.com


To Post a message, send it to:   sip-h323 at eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: sip-h323-unsubscribe at eGroups.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to
listserv at mailbag.intel.com



More information about the sg16-avd mailing list