RE: [Megaco] Megaco: which spec to use?

["Kevin Boyle" <[e-mail]>]

The "corr" part actually stands for "Corrigenda", not correction.  Also, the
number tag at the end of the draft-etc-etc-etc-02 means that it is the
second version of the draft-etc-etc-etc document -- not a new .  This could
be for formatting, or editorial corrections, or any of a number of other
reasons.  The draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr document is the result of merging
the Implementors' Guide changes as of February 2002 with RFC 3015.  This has
already been issued in the ITU as H.248.1 v1.  Because the changes were in
the IG, they are normative -- the corrigenda draft (and future RFC) provides
one place to reference the spec, rather than needing both the RFC and the
IG.
 
All the implementations I'm aware of are using the Corrigenda version at
minimum.
 
Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Pascal Lambers [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 3:45 PM
To: Boyle, Kevin [NCRTP:3R90:EXCH]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco: which spec to use?


Ok, thanks.
 
So, if I understand this correctly, ietf's correction 2 on RFC 3015,
corresponds to some or more annexes of H.248.1. For ietf the corrections are
not yet normative (as they need to be pushed towards RFC status first), but
for ITU-T the corresponding corrections are normative.
 
What do most vendors implement then?
 
Pascal
 

 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kevin Boyle <mailto:[e-mail]>  
To: Pascal Lambers <mailto:[e-mail]>  ; [e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]>  
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 9:30 PM
Subject: RE: [Megaco] Megaco: which spec to use?


You have a misunderstanding as to what does and does not constitute a
standard.
 
RFC 3015 is a "Proposed Standard" that outlines the original draft of the
Megaco/H.248 specification.  In accordance with the agreement between the
IETF and ITU, it is subject to the amendments contained within the
Implementors' Guide.  draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr is being pushed toward RFC
status to replace 3015.  It is identical to ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1,
02/2002 (hereafter referred to as H.248.1 v1).  draft-ietf-megaco-h248v2 is
being pushed toward RFC status as well.  It is identical to ITU-T
Recommendation H.248.1, 05/2002 (hereafter referred to as H.248.1 v2).  Both
of these will go forward as "Proposed Standards".
 
However, this only describes the status of these items as they pertain to
the IETF.  The ITU has issued both of the documents as Recommendations,
meaning that they have full weight and status as standards, as far as the
ITU is concerned.  The ITU and IETF are both widely recognized as standards
bodies that have authority to declare and retract standards as they see fit.
Megaco-H.248 work is progressed under a joint agreement between the two.
However, just because one body or the other is lagging in declaration of the
standard does not make it any less a standard.
 
One other small correction:  H.248.2 is NOT H.248 v2.  H.248.2 is what used
to be H.248 Annex F.  The annexes were renumbered to make for easier
reference.  The base spec is H.248.1 (with a version 1 and version 2) and
the annexes are H.248.2 through H.248.20 (currently).  I anticipate that we
will add H.248.21 in May.
 
Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Pascal Lambers [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 3:07 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [Megaco] Megaco: which spec to use?


Hello, 
 
May I ask some questions about which Megaco spec to hold on to...
 
 
For Megaco, Ietf has different documents:

*	Gateway Control Protocol Version 1: RFC 3015
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3015.txt?number=3015
<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3015.txt?number=3015> ) 

*	draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr-01.txt 

*	draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr-02.txt
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr-02.txt
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-megaco-3015corr-02.txt> )

As there is no RFC for version 2 yet, the only norm is version 1. Vendors
who implemented specifcic corrections and amendements specified in the
corrective documents are in fact not conform to the official Megaco spec, as
"it is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite
them other than as work in progress." Is this interpretation correct?
 
Now, my second question: what about ITU-T's H.248 specifications? I
understand that RFC 3015 corresponds to H.248. But what about H.248.1,
H.248.2, etc. Are they official or just corrections and ideas for a new
official spec yet to come?
 
 
Is any vendor relying on this spec, or does everybody take the RFC 3015?
 
 
 
Thanks in advance,
Pascal

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