AW: TD-54a/Osaka: New ReleaseCompleteReason for Annex M?

[Klaghofer Karl ICN SIB NL D1]

Rich,

A new tunneling specific H.225.0 ReleaseCompleteReason would be valuable to
be received at an ingress GWY from the egress GWY.

However, regarding SCN  mapping rules of such a new ReleaseCompleteReason to
Cause IE, I do not like any of the proposed values:

*       Cause 88 "incompatible destination" is not suitable.
*       Cause 111 "Interworking, unspecified" would sound good.  However, in
case of Annex M1, a QSIG PINX would interpret Cause 111 as "Protocol error,
unspecified" (this is what Cause 111 is defined in QSIG).
*       Cause 63 is not really suitable since tunneling is not a service or
option requested by the SCN (e.g. QSIG side).

Regards,
Karl
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von:  Rich Bowen [SMTP:rkbowen at CISCO.COM]
> Gesendet am:  Monday, June 19, 2000 00:22
> An:   ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> Betreff:      TD-54a/Osaka: New ReleaseCompleteReason for Annex M?
>
> Mr. Holm and others,
>
> In Osaka it was suggested during the discussion of TD-54a (Draft Annex
> M.2, ISUP tunneling) that a new ReleaseCompleteReason is needed to
> support tunnelling.  The reason would indicate that the called endpoint
> is dropping the call because it rejects tunnelling and the
> tunnellingRequired flag was set in the Setup message.
>
> My notes indicate that I was to look into whether this was needed in
> H.225.0 v4.  The existing reasons are:
>
> ReleaseCompleteReason ::= CHOICE
> {
>         noBandwidth                     NULL,   -- bandwidth taken
>                                                    away or ARQ denied
>         gatekeeperResources             NULL,   -- exhausted
>         unreachableDestination          NULL,   -- no transport path
>                                                    to the destination
>         destinationRejection            NULL,   -- rejected at
>                                                    destination
>         invalidRevision                 NULL,
>         noPermission                    NULL,   -- called party's
>                                                    gatekeeper rejects
>         unreachableGatekeeper           NULL,   -- terminal cannot
>                                                    reach gatekeeper
>                                                    for ARQ
>         gatewayResources                NULL,
>         badFormatAddress                NULL,
>         adaptiveBusy                    NULL,   -- call is dropping
>                                                    due to LAN crowding
>         inConf                          NULL,   -- no address in
>                                                    AlternativeAddress
>         undefinedReason                            NULL,
>         ...,
>         facilityCallDeflection          NULL,   -- call was deflected
>                                                    using a Facility
>                                                    message
>         securityDenied                  NULL,   -- incompatible
>                                                    security settings
>         calledPartyNotRegistered        NULL,   -- used by gatekeeper
>                                                    when endpoint has
>                                                 -- preGrantedARQ to
>                                                    bypass ARQ/ACF
>         callerNotRegistered             NULL,   -- used by gatekeeper
>                                                    when endpoint has
>                                                 -- preGrantedARQ to
>                                                    bypass ARQ/ACF
>         newConnectionNeeded             NULL,   -- indicates that
>                                                    the Setup was not
>                                                    accepted on this
>                                                 -- connection, but
>                                                    that the Setup may
>                                                    be accepted on
>                                                 -- a new connection
>         nonStandardReason               NonStandardParameter,
>         replaceWithConferenceInvite     ConferenceIdentifier
>                                                 -- call dropped due
>                                                    to subsequent
>                                                 -- invitation to a
>                                                    conference
>                                                 -- (see H.323 8.4.3.8)
> }
>
> So I'll ask ... is a new reason needed?
>
> If so, Mr. Holm's draft contains an editor's note that suggests a reason
> code of "tunnelRejected".  Should I incorporate that value as a
> ReleaseCompleteReason?
>
> If so, what Q.931/Q.850 mapping should I add to Table 5/H.225.0 for this
> reason?  Some suggestions:
>
> 63 - Service or option not available, unspecified
> 88 - Incompatible destination
> 111 - Interworking, unspecified
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard K. Bowen                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
> VoIP Session Protocols               Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to
> listserv at mailbag.intel.com

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