Private telephone number in H.323v4

Francois Audet audet at nortelnetworks.com
Wed Jun 20 19:41:50 EDT 2001


Hi Bob,
 
I understand what you are saying (and I fully agree). However, H.323v4
section 7.8.2.1 on Calling party number contradicts H.225.0 with the
following: 
When address information represents a telephone number, the relevant
information may appear in the Calling Party Number IE. This IE contains the
caller's number, information about the number, and presentation and
screening indicators found in octet 3a. This is the recommended mode of
operation for the case where a PSTN Gateway sends a Setup message on the
packet network.
Alternatively, calling party information may appear in the sourceAddress,
presentationIndicator, and screeningIndicator fields of the Setup message.
This mode of operation is required when the sourceAddress is not in any form
of telephone number (i.e., sourceAddress is not type a dialedDigits or
partyNumber).
I'm saying that H.323v4 is misleading and should really say the following to
be consistent with H.225.0v4.
When address information represents a public (E.164) telphone number or a
telephone number of unknown type, the relevant information may appear in the
Calling Party Number IE. This IE contains the caller's number, information
about the number, and presentation and screening indicators found in octet
3a. This is the recommended mode of operation for the case where a PSTN
Gateway sends a Setup message on the packet network.
Alternatively, calling party information may appear in the sourceAddress,
presentationIndicator, and screeningIndicator fields of the Setup message.
This mode of operation is required when the sourceAddress is not in any form
of a public or unknown telephone number (i.e., sourceAddress is not type a
dialedDigits or partyNumber.164Number); an example of such a case is a
Private Number which shall be encoded in a
sourceAddress.partyNumber.privateNumber.
Same applies for 7.8.2.2.
 
Right?
-----Original Message-----
From: Callaghan, Robert [mailto:Robert.Callaghan at icn.siemens.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:59 AM
To: Audet, Francois [SC2:4K02:EXCH]; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Private telephone number in H.323v4


Francois,
 
See H.225.0 Section 7.2.2.4 (Called Party Number):
 
Numbering plan identification (octet #3, bit 1-4)
-********** Encoded following the values and rules of Table 4-9/Q.931. If
set to "1001" (Private Numbering Plan) in a packet based network originated
call, this indicates that (1)the E.164 address is not present in SETUP, and
(2)the call will be routed via an alias address in the user-to-user
information.
 
This says that the identification of the Private Number Plan requires the
call to be routed based on an alias address in the UUI.  This also means
that the Private Number Plan cannot indicate that a number conforming to a
private numbering plan is present in the IE.
 
It is possible to use the value indicating an Unknown Number Plan and place
a private number in the IE.  However, this is only a digit string without
any defined structure.
 
Bob
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Callaghan
Siemens Enterprise Networks
Tel:  +1.561.997-3756  Fax:  +1.561.997-3403
Email:   <mailto:Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com>
Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com
--------------------------------------------------------
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet at nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:40 PM
To: Callaghan, Robert; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Private telephone number in H.323v4
 
Hi Bob, 
I'm not sure I understand your point. 
The way I read it now: 
*         H.323 says "Put a private number in the Q.931 IE"; and
*         H.225.0 says "Put a private number in the UUIE".
 
Which one is it? I think you are saying H.225.0 is right (I tend to agree
and so does Paul). We need to make sure everybody does (Glenn in
particular), and H.323 should be clarified, because I would assume most
people who read it will think they are supposed to put the IE in the Q.931
information element.
-----Original Message----- 
From:   Callaghan, Robert [SMTP:Robert.Callaghan at icn.siemens.com] 
Sent:   Wednesday, June 20, 2001 05:00 
To:     Audet, Francois [SC2:4K02:EXCH]; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)' 
Cc:     'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul JONES (E-mail)' 
Subject:        RE: Private telephone number in H.323v4 
Francois, 
  
The problem is that both H.323 and H.225.0 state that in the Q.931 elements
used for "telephone numbers" the code point indicating the presence of a
private number is used to indicate that the address is in the UUI.  It is
not possible to conform to this usage and to use this value to indicate that
the Q.931 element contains a private number.

Bob 
------------------------------------------------------- 
Robert Callaghan 
Siemens Enterprise Networks 
Tel:  +1.561.997-3756  Fax:  +1.561.997-3403 
Email:  Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com <
mailto:Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com
<mailto:Robert.Callaghan at ICN.Siemens.com> > 
-------------------------------------------------------- 
  
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Audet [ mailto:audet at nortelnetworks.com
<mailto:audet at nortelnetworks.com> ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:27 PM
To: Callaghan, Robert; 'Glenn FREUNDLICH (E-mail)'
Cc: 'SG16 ITU-T (E-mail)'; 'Paul JONES (E-mail)'
Subject: Private telephone number in H.323v4 
  
Hi, 
  
I just realize a contradiction in H.323v4 and H.225.0v4 concerning the
encoding of "private telephone numbers" (i.e., the type we all use at work):
*         H.225.0v4 says that "Private telephone numbers" shall be encoded
in the UUIE as private numbers, and NOT in the Q.931 information elements
(Calling party IE, etc.). Let's call this the "Bob method". See Table
18/H.225.0 Note 1.
*         H.323v4 says that the Q.931 information element is used for
"telephone numbers", and that the UUIE is used for things that are not
telephone numbers. Let's call this the "Glenn method". See H.323v4/7.8.2.1
and 7.8.2.2.
There is no conflict with both method for "public" telephone number, but
there is a conflict for "private" telephone numbers.

Which method is right, Bob's or Glenn's? 
  
---- 
François AUDET, Nortel Networks 
< mailto:audet at nortelnetworks.com <mailto:audet at nortelnetworks.com> >,
tel:+1 408 495 3756 
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.packetizer.com/pipermail/sg16-avd/attachments/20010620/11e2d533/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the sg16-avd mailing list