Re: [Megaco] Re: Usage of LocalControl,Local and Remote Descriptors!

[Christian Groves <[e-mail]>]

G'Day,

I agree with Kevin we should include these in the implementors' guide.

Regards, Christian

Kevin Boyle wrote:
> 
> If the concerns pointed out exist in H.248.1 v1 (03/2002), then any
> corrections belong in the IG.  The intent of the RFC is to produce identical
> text to the ITU-T Recommendation as much as possible, correct?
> 
> Kevin
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taylor, Tom-PT [CAR:5N00:EXCH]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:33 AM
> To: H.S.Sureshchandra
> Cc: Simran Chadha; Megaco List
> Subject: Re: [Megaco] Re: Usage of LocalControl,Local and Remote
> Descriptors!
> 
> My apologies -- I failed to keep this somewhwere where I would remember it
> when the
> time came.  The ridiculous part is that the "authors' 48 hours" actually
> lasted a
> full month due to other delays.
> 
> We can do two things now: record the corrections in the Implementor's Guide,
> and
> register them as errata against the RFC with the RFC Editor.  I'll work on
> that today.
> 
> H.S.Sureshchandra wrote:
> 
> > Hello Tom,
> >
> > I do not see incorporation of any of the observations made by my
> > colleague Simran Chadha in the new RFC 3525, as "promised" by you in
> > your earlier mail.
> >
> > Please clarify. Thanks !
> >
> > Suresh
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Taylor" <[e-mail]>
> > To: "Simran Chadha" <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: "Megaco List" <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:29 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Megaco] Re: Usage of LocalControl,Local and Remote
> > Descriptors!
> >
> >
> >
> >>That "cannot not" is a typo -- I'll remove the "not" during the
> >>"authors'
> >
> > 48 hours"
> >
> >>interval prior to formal publication as a new RFC.
> >>
> >>On your second point: the two paragraphs apply independently to
> >
> > ReserveGroup and
> >
> >>ReserveValue.  That is, it is possible to have ReserveGroup TRUE and
> >
> > ReserveValue
> >
> >>FALSE -- in which case the MG reserves for multiple session
> >>descriptions
> >
> > but is
> >
> >>restricted to one codec in each -- or vice versa.  Or both could be
> >>TRUE,
> >
> > or both FALSE.
> >
> >>On the third point, the intended meaning would be conveyed by
> >>replacing
> >
> > "if it
> >
> >>cannot support any of the alternatives" with "if it can support none
> >>of
> >
> > the
> >
> >>alternatives".  Perhaps I can also do that during the "authors' 48
> >>hours"
> >
> > period,
> >
> >>though we would usually do it through the ITU-T Implementor's Guide.
> >>
> >>The task of developing an unambiguous protocol specification is not
> >
> > simple.  Your
> >
> >>points have eluded others in the three years since first approval.
> >>Thank
> >
> > you for
> >
> >>your contribution.
> >>
> >>Simran Chadha wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi List,
> >>>
> >>>Can someone please help me at the earliest on the issues raised
> >>>earlier by me - particularly, usage of LocalControl,Local and Remote
> >>>Descriptors
> >
> > ?
> >
> >>>Thanks in advance.
> >>>
> >>>Simran Chadha
> >>>On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 Simran  Chadha wrote :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi List,
> >>>>
> >>>>Can you please help me with clarifications in my understanding of
> >>>>sections 7.1.7 and 7.1.8 on the use of LocalControl,Local and Remote
> >>>>Descriptors.
> >>>>
> >>>>As per draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr-03, in section 7.1.7,
> >>>>If the value of a Reserve property is True, the MG SHALL reserve
> >>>>resources for all alternatives specified in the Local and/or Remote
> >>>>descriptors for which it currently has resources available. It SHALL
> >>>>respond with the alternatives for which it reserves resources. If it
> >>>>cannot not support any of the alternatives, it SHALL respond with a
> >>>>reply to the MGC that contains empty Local and/or Remote
> >>>>descriptors. The use of two negations - "cannot not" in the last
> >>>>statement will imply that - If it can support any of the
> >>>>alternatives, it SHALL respond with a reply to the MGC that contains
> >>>>empty Local and/or Remote descriptors. I don't think this is what is
> >>>>meant to be conveyed here.
> >>>>
> >>>>Also in section 7.1.7 the first para starts - If the value of a
> >>>>Reserve property is True, ..... while the second para starts - If
> >>>>the value of a Reserve property is False, ....
> >>>>Now as there are two Reserve properties - one Reserve Group and the
> >>>>other Reserve Value, One could be False and the other could be True.
> >>>>Then in this case what will be the inference - Should para 1 apply or
> >>>>para 2 ? Both the paras would seem to be mutually exclusive in what is
> >>>>needed to be done.
> >>>>
> >>>>Also statements like "if it cannot support any of the alternatives
> >>>>... " - will have two meanings. 1. Any -  Not even one - NONE of the
> >>>>alternatives is supported.
> >>>>2. Any -  Atleast one   - While a few alternatives can be supported, a
> >>>>few might not be.
> >>>>
> >>>>The protocol needs to be more clear on such aspects in the documents
> >>>>henceforth. The English language is understood in different parts of
> >>>>the world. Variations to agreed usage of the language terms will
> >>>>make it difficult for new users of Megaco protocol, like me.
> >>>>
> >>>>Can someone please educate me on the exact usage and meaning of
> >>>>LocalControl,Local and Remote Descriptors ?
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks and awaiting comments and clarifications
> >>>>
> >>>>Simran Chadha
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Megaco mailing list
> >>>[e-mail] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
> >>>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Megaco mailing list
> >>[e-mail]
> >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Megaco mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
> _______________________________________________
> Megaco mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco


_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco