The question about extension of an H.248 package.

[Sasha Ruditsky]

Hi Christian

Thanks.

One more question.
In H.248.19 most of the properties inside packages are specified to be
"Defined in: Local/Remote".
>From what I know about H.248 -- local/remote descriptors contain SDP
messages.

How do the H.248.19 properties coexist with SDP?
Is it only possible in binary encoding mode?

Thanks,
Sasha

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Groves [mailto:christian.groves at ERICSSON.COM] 
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:35 AM
To: Sasha Ruditsky
Cc: itu-sg16 at external.cisco.com
Subject: Re: The question about extension of an H.248 package.

Hello Sasha,

There is no hard rule of what to propose. It really depends on the type
of information you want added.

I think the only time the package extension should be used is if the
added properties/signals/events provide a set of functions of their own
right. e.g. 
would it makes sense that these properties could be a package by
themselves but need another package to operate. For example: The tone
gen package. The DTMF was added as a extension package as DTMF
generation is its own subset functionality but is related to the
generation of tones.

Regards, Christian

Sasha Ruditsky wrote:

> Hi
>  
> I'm working on a proposal for July meeting to add some new properties 
> to one of  the H.248.19 packages.
>>From H.248 document it appears that there are defined (at least) two
> ways of doing this.
> 
> *	Creating a new version of an existing package
> *	Creating a new package that extends the existing one.
> 
>  
> Can somebody please comment on the factors helping to determine which 
> of these two mechanisms should be uses?
>  
> Thanks,
> Sasha
> .
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 2778 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.packetizer.com/pipermail/sg16-avd/attachments/20050616/33c49683/attachment-0006.bin>