H.323 Annex O

[Roy, Radhika R, ALARC]

Hi, Paul and All:

May be many people did the similar or the same thing. Who knows what we can
call it - "invention" or "prior art."

The bottom line is that we have contributions in the IETF in the public
domain for the SIP-H.323 Interworking, and these contributions are theirs.
We cannot use their proposed solutions unless they permit. However, if there
are people who claim that they did it before those contributions, they need
to speak out now bringing their contributions. Unless they do, we have no
way of knowing this.

We have also seen Chip Sharp's and Scott Bradner's email. Their emails
further clarify the process of the both organizations: IETF and ITU.

This is one of the problems that we need to sort out. One way of doing is
that we can create an Informational RFC as all authors of those
contributions have agreed to do so. We can then see whether this
Informational RFC can be made a standard one as stated below:

1. To see whether this can be made a standard track RFC in the IETF or

2. To use the Informational/Standardtrack RFC to the SG16 to make a formal
standard in the SG16 (if the normative reference cannot be used for the
Informational RFC, we have to find out some other ways how we can do this
[e.g., SIP WG Chair can request that individuals be appointed formal
ISOC/IETF representatives to the ITU-T])

To meet the backward compatibility (e.g., Roni mentioned it) and other
concerns, we can work out this as well (both in the
Informational/Standardtrack RFC/IETF and SG16).

Considering all OPTIONs, the above two steps seem to be the most reasonable
way to proceed.

Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul E. Jones [SMTP:paulej at PACKETIZER.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 1:35 AM
> To:   ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> Subject:      Re: H.323 Annex O
>
> Radhika,
>
> > The key is that the SG16 cannot use the interworking solution that has
> been
> > "invented" by the other companies or institutions without their consent
> and
> > participation. I personally feel very strongly that the SG16 cannot not
> > "invent" a NEW interworking solution of its own that will NOT include
> the
> > solutions proposed by others in the IETF.
>
> I like this one... I've already built a SIP/H.323 interworking device-- a
> long time ago, before any group in any standards organization was formed
> to
> work on the issue.  I would question whether such an IWF could even be
> called an "invention", as it is certainly "prior art".
>
> Paul
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 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