On TD26 - Fast TCS and M/S negotiation in H.323v4

[Bob Gilman]

Pete-
Thanks for your reply.  What I had in mind for the early H.245 reply that
might come before acceptance of fastStart were things like completion of TCS
exchange and M/S negotiation (and, perhaps, user-dialed digits if I understood
Mr. Callahan's mail correctly.)  With regard to ending fastStart, I believe
everyone expects it to be a one-shot deal (with a possible exception for Annex
F sets).
-Bob
----------------------------------------------------
Bob Gilman       rrg at lucent.com      +1 303 538 3868


Pete Cordell wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Thanks for your comments...
>
> At the moment I can't see any benefit in doing a bit of H.245 before doing
> fast start.  Fast start is really only saving you a round trip, and if you
> don't do any fast start for that period, then surely you might as well have
> done it using H.245 anyway.  I might be missing something, so please explain
> what you have in mind.
>
> As starting H.245 kills off fast start in current systems, I was assuming
> that once the fast start data in the new arrangement had been handled it
> would also be killed off.  Put another way, from my point of view I was
> seeing the fast start as a one shot deal which are effectively fast virtual
> OLCs.  My gut feeling is that allowing them later introduces complications.
> I would be interested in other peoples comments on the implications of this.
>
> I think I prefer your suggestion about sticking with the early H.245 tunnel
> rather than switching to the existing tunnel.  I was merely trying to align
> the text with what Paul J proposed.
>
> Pete.
>
> =============================================
> Pete Cordell
> Tech-Know-Ware
> pete at tech-know-ware.com
> +44 1473 635863
> =============================================
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob Gilman <rrg at LUCENT.COM>
> To: <ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM>
> Sent: 06 June 2000 17:01
> Subject: Re: On TD26 - Fast TCS and M/S negotiation in H.323v4
>
> > Pete-
> > Thanks for the writeup on earlyH245Control.  I would like
> > to suggest that make acceptance of fastStart independent
> > of the acceptance of earlyH245Control.  It might be useful
> > for the called endpoint (or gatekeeper) to accept early
> > H.245 and proceed with TCS and M/S negotiations before
> > it establishes any media channel via the FastStart procedures.
> > This could be done by permitting the earlyH245Control element
> > in all messages (like fastStart), or in the basic H323-UU-PDU
> > (like h245Control).  That way, FastStart is accepted by the
> > return of a fastStart element, and acceptance of early H.245 is
> > clearly accepted by the return of an earlyH245Control element.
> > The use of the earlyH245Control tunnel would then be enabled.
> > (Is there any reason to move to the h245Control tunnel?)
> > Should we prohibit both an earlyH245Control and an h245Control
> > element in the same message?  What do you think?
> > -Bob
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> > Bob Gilman       rrg at lucent.com      +1 303 538 3868
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 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

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