[H.323Mobility:]
Roy, Radhika R, ALARC
rrroy at ATT.COM
Thu Feb 24 07:50:18 EST 2000
Hi, Paul and Jaakko:
Thanks for the update. I would propose that let Paul Guram control the TD
numbers because Paul G. would be the single point of coordination (leaving
no room for confusions either for Annex H, E, or I).
I have a question to Jaakko related to the meeting minutes of Ad Hoc
Mobility group of the last SG16 meeting: Why no mention about AT&T
contributions (D.353 & D.354)? Would you please re-distribute the meeting
minute updating the document stating the status of the AT&T contributions
what exactly happened in the meeting? if you need help in this regard,
please let me know.
Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy
AT&T
PS: A suggestion to Jaakko: With respect to TMSI, etc., I did not see any
reference to any contributions in you email reply. Any additions/changes to
the ITU document are made based on contributions. Only editorial changes are
made by editors. In fact, TMSI, etc. were added when contributions were made
and these were accepted after discussion. If there are problems, we would
like to see more contributions explaining how these create problems.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guram Paul-LPG019 [SMTP:lpg019 at EMAIL.MOT.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 7:16 PM
> To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> Subject: Re: [H.323Mobility:]
>
> Hi ad hoc Mob. Group
>
> 1. We will continue, as previously, and use the URL
> (ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/Mobility-adhoc/ ) which has been
> allocated for our group's use. New contributions to start as (Mobility
> document) MDs to distinguish from the old numerous numbering schemes (for
> MTD,e.g. mtd03, mtd 201, etc.). I suggest we start at md010 as the first
> contribution with md001 to md009 to be used for management activities (to
> be
> defined later). When contributing, look at the ftp site for the next
> number
> available, reserve it by announcing to group, then (if no conflict of
> numbers) load it onto the site. OR we could ask one of Paul (R or G), Roy,
> or for Jaakko to control the allocation of the numbers, if you think that
> would be a better way which avoids clash of same number being used.
> 2. Jaakko has sent us the zipped file with the TD129 from Geneva for
> Annex H. This is the document Jaakko will work on as the base-line
> document
> and Jaakko, could this be put onto the ftp site as Annex H version 03
> (version 01 being Red Bank output, version 2 being ad hoc group input into
> Geneva, and version 3 being Geneva output). Following on from Nicolas
> Tran's comments, there are already (minor) changes to be made to version
> 3,
> and this will be done as part of regular editor update. Similarly for the
> ToR document. Is that acceptable ?
> 3. Apart from Radhika, I have not received availability information
> for
> our next conf. call from anyone else. Please let me know which dates are
> most suitable from 20-24 March to enable me to arrange for an appropriate
> date.
>
> Regards
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy, Radhika R, ALARC [mailto:rrroy at att.com]
> Sent: 23 February 2000 15:58
> To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> Subject: Re: [H.323Mobility:]
>
> Hi, Paul and Jaakko:
>
> Many thanks for the information.
>
> Paul Guram: Please provide a well thought convention for
> the
> document
> number. For example, MTD.xxx would be given to
> diiferentiate
> from the
> reqular TDs. One request to you: Once a numbering
> convention
> is used, please
> try to stick to that rule (if we change the rule in the
> middle, it creates
> confusions as it happened last time).
>
> Best regards,
> Radhika R. Roy
> AT&T
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jaakko Sundquist [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist at NOKIA.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 9:01 AM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: Re: [H.323Mobility:]
> >
> > Hi Radhika et al,
> >
> > There seems to be a subdirectory in the pictel-site for
> mobility. The URL
> > is: ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/Mobility-adhoc/ .
> I
> suggest that we
> > will put our contributions there. It would be nice to
> have
> some naming
> > convention (such as the MTD-xxx scheme) for the
> documents.
> Maybe Paul
> > should
> > assign these numbers as he is now the moderator for the
> teleconferences...
> >
> > - Jaakko Sundquist
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EXT Roy, Radhika R, ALARC
> [mailto:rrroy at att.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000
> 3:34
> PM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> > Subject: Re: [H.323Mobility:]
> >
> > Hi, Jaakko:
> >
> > I agree with your reply that was also
> reflected in my
> > earlier email.
> >
> > I have a question to you and Paul Guram:
> Have you guys
> > decided where the
> > incoming contributions for the Ad Hoc
> group to be sent and
> > where the URL
> > would be for accessing to that website?
> If
> it is so,
> > please
> > let all of us
> > know soon.
> >
> > Paul Guram: Are you close to decide the
> meeting date and
> > time as well?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Radhika R. Roy
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jaakko Sundquist
> [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist at NOKIA.COM]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000
> 3:37
> AM
> > > To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > > Subject: [H.323Mobility:]
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm sending here the documents related
> to H.323 Annex H
> > that were
> > > accomplished in the Geneva meeting by
> the ad hoc
> > mobility
> > group. Included
> > > are the draft Annex H, the Terms of
> Reference for it as
> > well as the
> > > meeting
> > > minutes (quite short) of the ad hoc
> group meetings in
> > Geneva.
> > >
> > > As Mr. Tran pointed out the location
> area had been left
> > to
> > the VLF-section
> > > of the draft annex. This is my mistake
> and I apologize
> > for
> > any confusion
> > > it
> > > has created. I did not, however, take
> it
> off from the
> > document I am
> > > sending
> > > here, this is the document that was
> produced as a TD in
> > Geneva, but I will
> > > remove the location area from the
> subsequent versions of
> > the draft annex.
> > > As for the TMSI, etc. concepts, in my
> view it is quite
> > unnecessary to
> > > argue
> > > about these, the TMSI is already
> included in the
> > proposed
> > new alias
> > > address
> > > type: UIM. Many of these concepts are,
> as I understand,
> > already needed in
> > > H.246 Annex E, which addresses one
> scenario of the
> > mobility problem. I
> > > would
> > > see the VLR functionality of the H.246
> Annex E IWF as
> > really the VLF we
> > > have
> > > defined as a new mobility functional
> entity, thus the
> > identifiers TMSI,
> > > etc.
> > > would be needed in the VLF at least in
> some cases.
> > However, it might be
> > > suitable to indicate that all of the
> identifiers
> > mentioned
> > in the VLF (and
> > > other) section(s) are not mandatory.
> > >
> > > <<GenevaMobility.zip>>
> > >
> > > - Jaakko Sundquist
> > >
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > > In a hole in the ground there
> lived
> a hobbit.
> > > Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled
> with the ends of
> > > worms and an oozy smell, nor yet
> a
> dry, bare,
> > > sandy hole with nothing in it to sit
> down on or to eat:
> > > it was a hobbit-hole, and that
> means comfort.
> > >
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > <<
> > File:
> > > GenevaMobility.zip >>
More information about the sg16-avd
mailing list