[Megaco] Determining type of COT at the initiating and at the responding M Gs
"Kamitses, Jerry" <jkamitses@sonusnet.com> Mon, 18 November 2002 22:17 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05710 for <megaco-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:17:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAIMJ9v23915; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:19:09 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAIMF6v23774 for <megaco@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:15:06 -0500
Received: from revere.sonusnet.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05595 for <megaco@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:12:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sonusdc3.sonusnet.com (sonusdc3.sonusnet.com [10.128.32.53]) by revere.sonusnet.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id gAIMEmR22187; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:14:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: by sonusdc3.sonusnet.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <V73Z9K89>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:14:58 -0500
Message-ID: <4CF48720B6E9D4118D040060CF2074E906C2AA70@sonusdc3.sonusnet.com>
From: "Kamitses, Jerry" <jkamitses@sonusnet.com>
To: megaco@fore.com, megaco@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:14:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: [Megaco] Determining type of COT at the initiating and at the responding M Gs
Sender: megaco-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco>, <mailto:megaco-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Media Gateway Control <megaco.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:megaco@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:megaco-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco>, <mailto:megaco-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
I recently compared the event package in MGCP
(e.g. draft-foster-mgcp-basic-packages-09.txt)
which supports the PSTN Continuity test, with
the Megaco protocol defined to support the same
COT function.
As defined by the MGCP Trunk package, the Call agent
is expected to know, through provisioning information,
which of the three types of COT test should be applied
to a given endpoint:
Originating Terminating
============ ===========
1) 4w -------------- 2010 Hz (co1)------> 4w
<------------- 2010 Hz (co1)------- (loopback)
2) 4w -------------- 1780 Hz (co2)------> 2w
<------------- 2010 Hz (co1)------- (transponder)
3) 2w -------------- 2010 Hz (co1)------> 2w/4w
<------------- 1780 Hz (co2)------- (transponder)
and then the Call Agent sends the appropriate message(s) to the
gateway(s). The gateway just does what the Call Agent dictates.
By contrast, the events/signals defined by the Basic Continuity
Package of Megaco, both version 1.0 and 2.0, do not seem to provide
the same degree of control to the MGC. Is this conclusion correct?
Is the gateway now required to know via provisioning which type
of COT it needs to perform? Is such provisioning provided in the
Megaco MIB ?
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
- [Megaco] Determining type of COT at the initiatin… Kamitses, Jerry