AW: Annex Gv2

Horvath Ernst ernst.horvath at SIEMENS.AT
Tue May 22 05:38:27 EDT 2001


Paul,

I welcome the proposal not to approve H.225.0 annex G v2 now.

In my contribution to Q.5/16 I suggest to make the mobility management
protocol a "profile" of the annex G protocol, after adding the few extras
that mobility management would require. However, some members  strongly
oppose to calling mobility management "H.225.0 annex G". Since the arguing
is about names rather than content, it would be undesirable to duplicate the
work and define nearly identical protocols in two different recommendations.


Maybe we can define a "master protocol" in a separate recommendation and
then derive various profiles from this master protocol: for the current
annex G (reference point A), for reference point B (GK-BE), for mobility
management, etc.

Regards,
Ernst Horvath
Siemens AG

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej at PACKETIZER.COM]
> Gesendet am: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2001 06:14
> An: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.intel.com
> Betreff: Re: Annex Gv2
>
> Paul,
>
> I think the decisions made for H.225.0 Annex Gv2 as it
> relates to Q.5 work
> should be considered, but I stress even more the other two issues: the
> editor feels that the content has not changed significantly enough and
> comments I've received from others relating to reference
> point D.  I believe
> the latter two issues are most significant.
>
> Two questions I hear from people often are "How does the GK
> talk to the BE?"
> and "What good does it do to have the usage information in
> Annex G when it
> can't be passed to/from the GK?"  Consideration should be
> given to whether
> those questions are adequately answered (which they're not)
> and whether we
> want to answer those question within the protocol at this time.
>
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Reddy, Paul K" <paul.k.reddy at INTEL.COM>
> To: <ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM>
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 7:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Annex Gv2
>
>
> > Hi Radhika,
> >
> > With respect to your point on 2a, Q.5/16 has been defined
> the Objectives,
> > scope, work plan for study period 2001-2004 during last Rapporteur's
> meeting
> > in Lanceston, Australia. As far as the protocol for H.MMS.1
> (Mobility for
> > Multimedia systems based on H.323) recommendation has not
> been decided as
> of
> > last meeting. Your contributions and other contributions
> have come in for
> > Porte Seguro's meeting in Brazil will consider for
> discussion on Mobility
> > protocols like H.MMS.General (based on H.225.0 AnnexG or
> other protocol
> > etc.)
> >
> > PS: Paul, I would recommend not to delay the approval of
> H.225.0 Annex
> Gv2,
> > if Annex Gv2 does not include the Mobility work. - Paul
> >
> > regards,
> > Paul
> >
> > Paul K. Reddy
> > Rapporteur for Q.5/16
> > Intel Corporation, Mailstop:JF3-377
> > 2111 N.E. 25th Avenue,
> > Hillsboro, OR - 97229, USA
> > Office Phone # +1 (503)-264-9896
> > Mobile Phone # +1 (503)-807-9564
> > Email: paul.k.reddy at intel.com
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roy, Radhika R [mailto:rrroy at ATT.COM]
> > Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:18 AM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: Re: Annex Gv2
> >
> >
> > Hi, Paul:
> >
> > Let me explain where H.225.0 Annex G may fit with respect
> to mobility as
> > well as non-mobility as follows:
> >
> > 1. Anything extension that does NOT deal with MOBILITY in
> H.225.0 Annex G
> > version 2 can be considered for approval.
> >
> > 2. Anything that deals with MOBILITY (or with an intention
> to support
> > mobility indirectly) in H.225.0 Annex G version 2 MUST NOT
> be considered
> for
> > approval because of the following:
> >
> > a. The scope and reference points of mobility Q.5/16 needs
> to be defined
> > that is consistent with its charter.
> >
> > b. H.MMS.x work will be defined and completed in accordance
> to item a.
> >
> > c. All applications can use the common protocol for
> HLF/VLF/AuF (and other
> > value-added services). It will be a new protocol and will
> NOT have any
> > application-specific name (e.g., H.225.0 Annex G).
> >
> > d. As soon as we complete item c, we will see what needs to
> be done for
> > H.323. In H.323, we may have to extend H.225.0 RAS +
> H.225.0 Annex G.
> These
> > are application-specific extensions to support MOBILITY
> (applicable for
> each
> > application as well: H.310, H.324, IMT-2000, etc.).
> >
> > This is what has been proposed by AT&T in all contributions.
> >
> > Hope this will help.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Radhika R. Roy
> > AT&T
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej at PACKETIZER.COM]
> > Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 10:06 PM
> > To: ITU-SG16 at MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> > Subject: Annex Gv2
> >
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > The editor of Annex G has recommended that we not approve
> Annex G at this
> > meeting, citing that there is insufficient material to
> warrant approval.
> I
> > have also heard comments from some that additional work
> should be done in
> > the area of defining reference point D.  Of course, we also
> have the open
> > question of where (if anywhere) Annex G fits into the H.MMS.x work.
> >
> > For the benefit of those not planning to attend the
> meeting, please tell
> me
> > if you would have objections to *not* approving Annex Gv2
> at this meeting.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > 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
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 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