Re: [codec] #5: Mention DTMF in requirements

I heard no decision as to DTMF tone encoding.

As far as I am concerned, the question of whether the codec MUST encode DTMF
tones accurately enough to be detected at the decoder output (or SHOULD or
non-requirement) is still open.

That question clearly is in-scope, and has nothing to do with signaling.

Stephen Botzko

On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>wrote:

> How is the never-ending debate among DTMF signalling *methods* in-scope
> for the Codec WG? I think that Henning brought this up in Anaheim only
> to make sure that we test some DTMF tones. The signalling method is out
> of scope for the codec itself.
>
> On 4/2/10 7:53 AM, stephen botzko wrote:
> > Are you two suggesting that in-band DTMF is a MUST?  Or alternatively a
> > SHOULD?
> >
> > Stephen Botzko
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:48 AM, James Rafferty
> > <James.Rafferty@dialogic.com <mailto:James.Rafferty@dialogic.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     I'd agree with Steve that are still many deployments which do not
> >     use RFC 2833 or RFC 4733. In our gateways, we've had to support
> >     interworking variations of tone support such as INFO and in-band, in
> >     addition to the RFC 2833 / RFC 4733.
> >
> >     James
> >     -----Original Message-----
> >     From: codec-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:codec-bounces@ietf.org>
> >     [mailto:codec-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:codec-bounces@ietf.org>] On
> >     Behalf Of Steve Underwood
> >     Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 2:27 AM
> >     To: codec@ietf.org <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
> >     Subject: Re: [codec] #5: Mention DTMF in requirements
> >
> >     On 03/29/2010 02:22 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> >     > On 03/28/2010 11:00 AM, stephen botzko wrote:
> >     >
> >     >> I would agree with this if I saw reasonable evidence that a
> >     >> preponderance of gateways and sending systems provide the
> >     signaling in
> >     >> these RFCs.
> >     >>
> >     >> Since I am not sure that this is the case, I am unconvinced that
> >     we can
> >     >> totally remove the requirement.
> >     >>
> >     >> I'd also say that an encoder that detects the DTMF tones and
> >     outputs the
> >     >> RFC 4733/34 events would fully meet the requirement.
> >     >>
> >     > As former CTO of a VoIP provider, I never saw a PSTN provider not
> >     supporting at
> >     > least RFC 2833 (even if one of them did not declare it in its SDP)
> >     >
> >     > Perhaps the question can be asked at the next SIPit event.
> >     >
> >     Its true that RFC2833 is widely deployed. Its even true that many
> >     systems have updated to RFC4733. Sadly, its also true that there are
> >     still many quirky implementations widely deployed, and a lot of
> people
> >     still need to interwork with audio DTMF.
> >
> >     Steve
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> codec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>
>