Clarification needed about AMR codec support

[Horvath Ernst]

Venkata,
 
D-284 was a contribution to the October-2002 meeting of SG16, but Question
3/16 did not accept the proposed text because of conflicts with the existing
AMR definitions in H.245. The editor of D-284 was invited to bring a revised
proposal to the next meeting, which seemingly did not happen. That's the
reason why the parameters proposed in D-284 never became a part of H.245.
 
Hope this solves your doubts.
 
Ernst

-----Original Message-----
From: Venkata Nanduri [mailto:vnanduri at cisco.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Oktober 2004 23:41
To: itu-sg16 at external.cisco.com
Cc: paulej at cisco.com
Subject: Clarification needed about AMR codec support


Hi,

This email is regarding a clarification needed about a document submitted to
SG16(SG 16 - Delayed contribution 284).

In the Document titled "Update on AMR speech codec support for H.245", Table
X.4 a parameter "octetAlign"
is mentioned. But the same is missing from the latest H245 formal
specification.

As per the document(Delayed contribution 284),  "octetAlign" parameter can
be used to specify
whether the bandwidth efficient or Octet aligned mode of operation is used.

Since, In the formal spec, this parameter is missing, how should we
negotiate whether
we want to use Bandwidth efficient or Octet aligned operation.

I also see other parameters(modeSet, ModeChangePeriod, ModeChangeNeighbour,
Crc,  robustSorting and interleaving)
mentioned in your document, but are missing from the formal spec.

Any information about how to negotiate those parameters?

Thanks
Venkata 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.packetizer.com/pipermail/sg16-avd/attachments/20041018/f2be33c8/attachment-0004.html>