H.323 Annex D

[Paul E. Jones]

Yes, I would agree that makes sense.  This would be most helpful.  Unfortunately, they're all published separately today.

The current Annex D requires H.245v4.
Annex E requires H.323v2 or higher, as does Annex F.

I think it would be worth noting this in the IG and then just pull those separate Annexes into H.323v4 so that we don't have to concern ourselves with that confusion going forward.  Perhaps we should make a point at the next meeting to raise the issue so that all new separately published Annexes contain this information.  We have several: H, I, J, K, L, M.1, M.2, and N.

Paul
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Francois Audet 
  To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 11:59 AM
  Subject: Re: H.323 Annex D


    I will seriously consider pulling Annex D into the main document.  It makes my life a bit easier, too.  However, I suppose it's worth noting which version of H.323 an Annex will work with in general.  I have had similar inquiries about Annex E and Annex F.  Perhaps a new section in the Implementers Guide is in order to address those issues?
  I think that it should be in the summary of the Recommendation, if we pusblish it separatly. Not everybody reads the implementor's guide (although they should). That is what we have done for H.323 to relate it to different versions of H.225.0 and H.245.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.packetizer.com/pipermail/sg16-avd/attachments/20000302/0f1c4ff7/attachment-0003.html>