Implementors Guide not normative?

Paul Long plong at IPDIALOG.COM
Thu Oct 11 10:55:46 EDT 2001


Christian,

Since the IG is not normative on H.248v1 (or any other "v" for that matter),
and v1 is not interoperable and possible not even implementable without it
(correct me if I'm wrong), it seems like we have two alternatives:

1. Move forward with v2 ASAP and hope that absolutely _nobody_ deploys a v1
entity. (If it were a true v1-compliant entity, it would be broken because
v1 is broken; if it were a v1+IG entity, it wouldn't be v1-compliant.)
2. Produce a v1 Corrigendum so that a v1 entity is viable.

Paul Long
ipDialog, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mailing list for parties associated with ITU-T Study Group 16
[mailto:ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM]On Behalf Of Christian Groves
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 8:39 PM
To: ITU-SG16 at mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM
Subject: Re: Implementors Guide not normative?


G'Day,

Personally as I've mentioned in previous meetings I would support the
approval of v2 to bring in the changes from the IGs. I feel that a 80
page corrigenda to a 134pg H.248v1 isn't very practical. It will also
help interoperability if you receive a v2 message then you know exactly
to expect. At previous interops different groups have implemented
different IG versions.

With regards to the 2 year guideline it would be 20 months between the
decision and the consent date for the recommendation. By the time the
consent period is finished and the recommendation is published it would
be very close to 2 years. We have had other recommendations in SG16
which have not aligned to the 2 year guideline.

Regards, Christian

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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