Latest draft H.245

OKUBO Sakae okubo at GITI.WASEDA.AC.JP
Mon Apr 23 22:02:25 EDT 2001


Hi Paul,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul, Manoj" <mpaul at TRILLIUM.COM>
To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: H.MMS.3: Presence and IM for H.323 Mobile systems.


> Hi Chern,
>
>   According to my understanding, when you say "Context Transfer", it
refers
> to some protocol having procedures and methods to trasfer the "Context".
And
> in IM and Presence, this context is the relevant IM and Presence
> information.
> Is that understanding correct?

Yes, this definition is correct.

> If yes, then the H.MMS.3 will define the methods and procedures in H.323
> protocol to enable H.323 to act as a "Context Transfer" protocol.
> (Like SIP defines new methods SUBSCRIBE etc. to act as transport protocol
for IM and Presence).

Yes and No, I have not work on IM and Presence for H.323,
The used for this should be extended further like protocol for H.324, H.310,
and IMT-2000 for example.
Hence I would like to propose a base line protocol that comes
with both the mobility management and the context transfer functionality.

> I think the concept of IM and Presence shall be derived from IETF IMPP,
but
> work needs to be done to define their mapping in context of H.323
signalling.

That is one of the problematic area. ITU-T is using ASN.1 PER and
IETF is using XML, the context not only need to be mapped, it is to be
converted and then transfer:

I understand that H.MMS.4 is doing that, but what is the base line encoding
will it used to carried it over
ASN.1 PER or XML????

SIP is different, as it uses SDP to carried every thing over.
What is H.323 based line protocol then?????

> Could you elaborate when you said "Hopefully some meaningful protocol name
> would be link to it.Example (M.RCTP - Robust Context Transfer Protocol)".
>
> thanks
> Manoj.

The reason I say this is because quote from Roy in the previous e-mail
(2/4/01)

"The protocol used among HLF, VLF, and
AuF entities may have all capabilities, functionalities and features as
described in the document, but MUST be called a different protocol (e.g.,
M.management) so that all application protocols including H.323 will be at
liberty to use it. So, the said protocol MUST NOT be called H.225.0 Annex G
or its extension. In other words, we are changing the name only (not the
capabilities, functions, or features). Similar will be the case for
Charging/Billing, Policy, Directory or others".

As well as from Francois
"B : Consider the mobility management as a service to make PER
USER, and NOT PER USER AND PER SYSTEM. define the database
containing data related to H.323 user and services. This database may be
considered as a subset of the global database related to the H.323
mobile user (this global database contains also data related to the network
access providing, billing, and other services). This global database and its
associated processes (access, updating...) are common to
different systems (related to the different access and service providers)
and are seen as common FEs (AuF, HLF, VLF). Define also relevant
interfaces between H.323 FEs and HLF,VLF,AuF-like FEs that
doesn't belong only to H.323 functional architecture. A common protocol (or
a protocol primarly designed for H.323 systems but
containing extensions to be supported on interfaces between FEs from
different systems, e.g. protocol compatible
with different protocol stacks, different address formats, etc...)."

M.RCTP is such kind of base line protocol.
The difference here is, M.RTCP does not replaced H.MMS.1
H.MMS.1 HLF, VLF and AuF will be still in place for user mobility.
What M.RCTP does is to supports all H.MMS.X requirements
to act as a "Context Transfer" platform, which support mobility management.
The mobility managment includes:

1) support for service mobility (e.g IM and Presence, H.MMS.2) and user
mobility (HLF, VLF, AuF),

2) as well as having an interface to the transport to support seamless
terminal mobility.

Cheers
Chern Nam Yap.





>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cny [mailto:cny at DCS.SHEF.AC.UK]
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 12:58 PM
> To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM
> Subject: Re: H.MMS.3: Presence and IM for H.323 Mobile systems.
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> May I know how much this thing will link to
> IETF BXXP (Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol), and
> IETF IMPP (Instant Messaging and Presence Protocol) ?????
>
> As for the new protocol mentioned below,
> I suppose what is normally involved  is known as Context Transfer,
> Hopefully some meaningful protocol name would be link to it.
> Example (M.RCTP - Robust Context Transfer Protocol)
>
> When is the dead line for the Brazil Meeting,
> I am still rushing out some spec of this new protocol.
>
> Cheers
> Chern Nam Yap
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roy, Radhika R, ALCOO" <rrroy at ATT.COM>
> To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 3:24 PM
> Subject: Re: H.MMS.3: Presence and IM for H.323 Mobile systems.
>
>
> > Hi, Manoj:
> >
> > I am providing a very quick comment. It is a good proposal and you are
> > assuming that H.MMS.1 will be the base protocol to be used.
> >
> > With respect to H.MMS.1 protocol, I like to mention that the mobility
> > management part of H.MMS.1 will be "called" a NEW protocol and will NOT
be
> > called as "H.225.0 Annex G or its extension."
>
> >
> > Based on this assumption, probably you can start your work.
> >
> > As time goes on, more comments will be provided.
> >
> > I appreciate your work.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Radhika R. Roy
> > AT&T
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul, Manoj [mailto:mpaul at TRILLIUM.COM]
> > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 10:28 PM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: H.MMS.3: Presence and IM for H.323 Mobile systems.
> >
> >
> >   Hi All,
> >     The purpose of this mail is to initiate work on H.MMS.3 standard,
> which
> > is
> > a part of H.MMS series for H.323 mobility systems. H.MMS.3 will address
> > Presence
> > and Instant Messaging services in H.323 Mobility multimedia systems.
> >     H.MMS.3 standard shall address the architecture, procedures and new
> > message/
> > information elements to enable H.323 as the transport protocol for
> Presence
> > and
> > Instant Messaging in mobile environment.
> >     As editor of H.MMS.3 document, I solicit contributions and
discussions
> > to
> > begin work in this area. Enclosed is the Scope and Terms of Reference
> > document
> > that was presented in SG16 Launceston meeting for H.MMS.3.
> >
> > thanks
> > Manoj Paul.
> > Trillium Digital Systems, (an Intel company).
> >
> >
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 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



More information about the sg16-avd mailing list