[H.323 Mobility:] A new editor's draft H.323 Annex H

Wed May 24 15:36:02 EDT 2000

Hi, Everyone:

We appreciate Jaakko for his quick update about the H.323 Annex H draft
(TD-47).

This draft is providing us a baseline document (yet to be reviewed and
agreed by all of us) against which we need to bring contributions suggesting
additions and modifications.

In the last SG16 Q.11-15/16 Osaka meeting (May 15-19, 2000), we requested
the editor to edit document based on the contributions discussed in the
meeting. However, we decided that there was not enough time to review the
H.323 Annex H (APC-1816) presented by the editor and the editor will produce
a draft that would be reviewed later by all of us.

Now Jaakko (Editor) has produced the draft (TD-47) for our review and
bringing contributions.

In the meantime, we will also address our issues via emails to resolve our
issues. In fact, we have already started this process.

Let us extend our sincere thanks to the editor.

Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy
AT&T
+1 732 420 1580
rrroy at att.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaakko Sundquist [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist at nokia.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 2:15 AM
> To:   ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> Subject:      Re: [H.323 Mobility:] A new editor's draft H.323 Annex H
>
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the late response, but I wasn't able to read my mails during the
> last week.
>
> The latest version of H.323 Annex H is the TD-47 from the Osaka meeting,
> ftp://standard.pictel.com/avc-site/0005_Osa/TD-47.zip . TD-56 includes the
> meeting notes from the Ad hoc group meetings in Osaka, but I'm afraid that
> no meeting minutes from the last teleconference are available. I can tell
> you, though, that in the last teleconference the H323AnnexH_EditorsDraft
> was
> presented by me and some minor changes were introduced by the group after
> which the result of that was produced as the contribution APC-1816 for the
> Osaka meeting.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> -Jaakko
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EXT Tiruthani, Saravanakumar
> > [mailto:Saravanakumar.Tiruthani at ICN.SIEMENS.COM]
> > Sent: 18. May 2000 1:15
> > To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> > Subject: Re: [H.323 Mobility:] A new editor's draft H.323 Annex H
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Do we have the latest version of Annex H after the recent
> > tel conference on mobility? Is the editor's draft
> > standards.pictel.com/avc-site/Incoming/Mobility-AHG/H323AnnexH
> > _EditorsDraft.
> > zip
> > the latest? Is the minutes available for the teleconference?
> >
> > Any help will be greatly appreciated.
> > Thanks,
> > Saravanakumar V. Tiruthani
> > Siemens ICN
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roy, Radhika R, ALARC [mailto:rrroy at ATT.COM]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 7:45 AM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> > Subject: Re: [H.323 Mobility:] A new editor's draft H.323 Annex H
> >
> >
> > Hi, Jaakko:
> >
> > 1. Home/Visited/Target/Visiting Network Address
> >
> > A quick reply related to your comment about mobile IP.
> >
> > The mobile IP cannot do the job of H.323 in the application
> > layer deals with
> > multimedia: audio, video, and/or video.
> >
> > However, if hooks are already there in the H.323 layer, only
> > then mobile IP
> > or other methods as appropriate can be used in the lower
> > layer (e.g., IP,
> > ATM) to do the job.
> >
> > So, the abstraction of home/visiting/foreign/target network
> > address (or
> > NPoA) should be there in the H.323 application layer.
> >
> > I hope that this will clarify the FUNDAMENTAL points of
> > mobility management
> > that AT&T contributions have explained.
> >
> > 2. GK Discovery
> >
> > MGA is another alternative option for the GK discovery. It is
> > also very
> > efficient when compared to the GRQ mechanisms. MGA is an OPTION, not
> > mandatory.
> >
> > If some people do NOT like this, they may use the GRQ
> > messages if they feel
> > they are happy with it in the cellular environment. AT&T does
> > NOT like to
> > use the inefficient GRQ messages.
> >
> > 3. Centralized/Distributed HLFs
> >
> > AT&T contributions show message flows for all configurations of HLFs:
> > Centralized and Distributed. The contributions show that it
> > is the same
> > messages that used for all cases.
> >
> > 4. Location_Req
> >
> > You are now using NEW messages location_req messages for
> > mobility messages.
> > AT&T contributions propose the new messages like mobility
> > binding updates.
> >
> > You are requested to look into these contributions instead of
> > going too.
> >
> > 5. Communications between HLFs for inter-domain communications.
> >
> > AT&T contributions show that this is NOT the scope of H.323. It is a
> > protocol between the servers. This is nothing to do with the
> > H.323 protocol.
> > The same is true for directory server to directory server
> > protocol, billing
> > server to the billing server protocol, etc.
> >
> > 6. Other comments
> >
> > We will discuss in the conf call and Osaka.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Radhika R. Roy
> > AT&T
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jaakko Sundquist [SMTP:jaakko.sundquist at nokia.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:10 AM
> > > To:   ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > > Subject:      Re: [H.323 Mobility:] A new editor's draft
> > H.323 Annex H
> > >
> > > Hi Radhika,
> > >
> > > Find my comments embedded...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I hope that you have been enjoying the ice-hockey....
> > > > Section 9.1.1:
> > > >
> > > > Like home domain, AT&T contribution has provided the detail
> > > > description of
> > > > home GK/zone from a user point. Accordingly, home network
> > > > address (network
> > > > point attachment) has been explained. In a given zone, a
> > > > mobile may move
> > > > from one NpoA to another. Like foreign (or
> > > > visited/visiting/target) domain,
> > > > AT&T contribution has also explained the foreign (or
> > > > visited/visiting/target) network address (or NpoA). The
> > > > subsequent emails
> > > > have also been sent explaining the things.
> > >
> > > With regards to the home GK, I am considering that it may be a good
> > > concept
> > > to introduce for some purposes (mainly because of GK
> > discovery issues and
> > > the Virtual Home Environment concept), but I have not yet
> > introduced in
> > > the
> > > draft, because I want to have a clearer picture of how the
> > concept would
> > > be
> > > used. I certainly do not like the idea of always having to
> > contact the
> > > home
> > > GK in order to be able to use the H.323 services, nor do I
> > like having to
> > > contact the HLF through the (home) GK. In other words I am
> > willing to add
> > > the concept as soon as we have agreed on the semantics of
> > it. I still do
> > > not
> > > see the merit of the home NPoA concept, I do not think it
> > adds anything
> > > that
> > > could not be achieved by using e.g. mobile IP.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hope to discuss the same in tomorrow's conf call.
> > > >
> > > > I am also curious to know which the team won the ice-hockey.....
> > > The Hentunen-Kapanen-Lind attacking line was quite superb...
> > >
> > >
> > > - Jaakko
> > >
> > >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > 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
> >
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 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