H.225.0 Annex G v1 - with corrections

[Michael Fortinsky]

I agree with Aseem.

D.392 from Geneva had this new field correctly qualified as OPTIONAL in any
message it appears (including IRR).

Besides H.323v3 Impl Guide, this error slipped in during editing phase also
to H.225.0v4 and needs to be corrected here as well.

Regards,
Karl Klaghofer
Siemens

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von:  Paul E. Jones [SMTP:paul.jones at ties.itu.int]
> Gesendet am:  Mittwoch, 22. März 2000 03:23
> An:   Aseem Agarwal
> Cc:   h323implementors at imtc.org; ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com; Klaghofer
> Karl ICN SIB NL D1
> Betreff:      Re: Doubt about CallLinkage structure in IRR message
>
> Aseem,
>
> That is definitely a typographical error-- the callLinkage field should
> definitely contain the OPTIONAL modifier.  I will make a correction to
> this
> and make mention of it at the next Question 13/16 meeting.
>
> Thanks for pointing that out.
>
> Best Regards,
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aseem Agarwal" <aseem at trillium.com>
> To: <paul.jones at ties.itu.int>
> Cc: <h323implementors at imtc.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 7:15 PM
> Subject: Doubt about CallLinkage structure in IRR message
>
>
> > Hi Paul,
> >   Implementers' Guide for H.225V3 (H323V3_IG_0002.zip) has added
> >   CallLinkage structure to perCallInfo in IRR as a mandatory IE.
> >
> >   Since the Call Linkage is an optional feature, it should be an
> >   optional IE. Is this a mistake or there is a reason behind it?
> >   Kindly clarify.
> >
> > thanks,
> > aseem at trillium.com
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> ------------------------------
> Please send E-mail to contact at imtc.org <mailto:contact at imtc.org>  to
> subscribe or unsubscribe from this list
> ------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -