From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 1 03:58:26 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F029428C25B;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 03:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D90A28C156
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 03:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.216
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[AWL=-0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35,
J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_26=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id x+Qj463fcC0o for ;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 03:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE4C03A6897
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 03:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.79])
by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m71AwGgi021195;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 12:58:16 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS23.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.53]) by
FRVELSBHS07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 12:58:16 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 12:58:15 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Questions about VMG
Thread-Index: Acjzgko4SM3Jk3i3SFGddDZ/Kx0omAAQvTMQ
References: <48925F37.70804@nteczone.com><48927882.5050901@nteczone.com>
From: "Schwarz Albrecht"
To: "ZhangXin"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2008 10:58:16.0578 (UTC)
FILETIME=[803F0620:01C8F3C5]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13
Cc: Megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Questions about VMG
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
There isn't any outstanding VMG, - all VMGs are equal.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ZhangXin
> Sent: Freitag, 1. August 2008 04:56
> To: Christian Groves
> Cc: Megaco@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Megaco] Questions about VMG
>
> Hi Christian,
> Thanks.
> Do we need to define a "major VMG" in a physical MG? I think
> all the VMGs in one physical MG are equal. Am I right?
>
> Regards,
> Sean
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christian Groves"
> To: "ZhangXin"
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [Megaco] Questions about VMG
>
>
> > Hello Sean,
> >
> > VMG gives the possibility of different network
> architectures. Depending
> > on the customer's network and vendor's offering, VMGs may
> reduce the cost.
> >
> > Regards, Christian
> >
> > ZhangXin wrote:
> >> Hi Christian,
> >> thank you for your prompt reply.
> >> I am wondering if the primary purpose of VMG is to reduce
> the cost for gateway facility?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Sean
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Christian Groves"
> >> To: "ZhangXin"
> >> Cc:
> >> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 8:56 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Megaco] Questions about VMG
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hello Sean,
> >>>
> >>> Please see CNG below.
> >>>
> >>> Regards, Christian
> >>>
> >>> ZhangXin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi list,
> >>>> I have 2 questions in H.248, can someone help me?
> >>>> 1. In H.248.1 V2 chap.11.1, why we need to divide a
> Physical MG to one
> >>>> or more virtual MGs? What is the advantage of VMG? Only
> because some
> >>>> VMGS can share some hardware and software resource?
> >>>>
> >>> [CNG] It allows multiple MGCs to use the same physical
> MG. Without the
> >>> VMG concept there is a one to one relationship between the a
> >>> MGC/Physical MG.
> >>>
> >>>> 2. Can a physical MG be divided to a TG(trunk gateway) and an
> >>>> AG(access gateway)?
> >>>>
> >>> [CNG] Yes, these would be two separate VMGs running an
> applicable profile.
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Sean
> >>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Megaco mailing list
> >>>> Megaco@ietf.org
> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Megaco mailing list
> Megaco@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 1 04:05:37 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 792C028C16C;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E5B28C16C
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.774
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.774 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.475,
BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id Ln8PlVwEFtCn for ;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (gc-na5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.5])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96503A67F3
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.74])
by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m71B5h3J029343;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:05:43 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS23.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.53]) by
FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:05:43 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:05:41 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
Thread-Index: AcjzHlbX44JHSdywS0qTp+nBMSbwuwAAS5kQACmSKsA=
References: <9E07F8717FE8BC4FBAE6860F61EA6C1D017D2564@spsrvmail03.nec.br>
From: "Schwarz Albrecht"
To: "Andre Rosa Stefanini"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2008 11:05:43.0219 (UTC)
FILETIME=[8A770830:01C8F3C6]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.84
Cc: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1942173121=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1942173121==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8F3C6.89E06129"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F3C6.89E06129
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Andre,
=20
facsimile is a voiceband data (VBD) service in PSTN/ISDN, there are
basically two transfer technologies in IP networks.
Before looking at the control aspects (=3D H.248), you should firstly
consider the bearer service options. See
=20
V.152 (01/05)
Procedures for supporting voice-band data over IP
networks =20
and
=20
T.38 (04/07)
Procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile
communication over IP networks =20
=20
Both ITU-T Recommendations providing sections on H.248.
You may see that there are two options already for T.38.
=20
/Albrecht
=20
=20
________________________________
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org]
On Behalf Of chaitanya.shubhachint@tektronix.com
Sent: Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2008 17:13
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
=09
=09
Appendix III (H.248 call establishment procedure examples for
facsimile-capable media gateways) from T.38 Spec should have what you
are looking for. I am looking at draft in force (04/2007).
________________________________
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Andre Rosa Stefanini
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 10:02 AM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
=09
=09
Hi,
=20
I've been asked about something not clear on specs: When a MG
receives fax and/or modem tones on RTP port, it should change the codecs
in order to allow tones to be passed in a correct way to be decoded as a
fax or modem in the other side. There are some options (i.e. using G.711
or T.38). This way, the MG which detected the fax tone must set up a new
codec. For this, we have two options: automatic or negotiated.=20
It's not clear on RFC which of these options is mandatory for
the MG, or if both of them. Could you help me with this?
Would someone could provide call-flows regarding fax/modem
detection?
=20
Thanks,
ANDRE
=20
=20
=20
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F3C6.89E06129
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Andre,
facsimile is a voiceband data (VBD) service =
in=20
PSTN/ISDN, there are basically two transfer technologies in IP=20
networks.
Before looking at the control aspects (=3D =
H.248), you=20
should firstly consider the bearer service options. =
See
V.152=20
(01/05) Procedures for =
supporting voice-band=20
data over IP networks
and
T.38=20
(04/07) Procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile =
communication=20
over IP networks
Both ITU-T Recommendations providing sections on=20
H.248.
You may see that there are two options already for=20
T.38.
/Albrecht
Appendix III (H.248 =
call=20
establishment procedure examples for facsimile-capable media gateways) =
from=20
T.38 Spec should have what you are looking for. I am looking at draft =
in force=20
(04/2007).
Hi,
I’ve been asked =
about something=20
not clear on specs: When a MG receives fax and/or modem tones on RTP =
port, it=20
should change the codecs in order to allow tones to be passed in a =
correct way=20
to be decoded as a fax or modem in the other side. There are some =
options=20
(i.e. using G.711 or T.38). This way, the MG which detected the fax =
tone must=20
set up a new codec. For this, we have two options: automatic or =
negotiated.=20
It’s not clear on =
RFC which of=20
these options is mandatory for the MG, or if both of them. Could you =
help me=20
with this?
Would someone could =
provide=20
call-flows regarding fax/modem detection?
Thanks,
ANDRE
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F3C6.89E06129--
--===============1942173121==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1942173121==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 1 09:10:21 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2597E3A6938;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 09:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F187D3A688E
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 09:10:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pCJxJUk1jB5X for ;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 09:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zcars04e.nortel.com (zcars04e.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 815033A6A6C
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 09:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com (zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com
[47.140.202.51])
by zcars04e.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id
m71G89v07476; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 16:08:10 GMT
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 12:10:06 -0400
Message-ID: <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA416172D26@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <31F873353B13F2419C80FD0833E118951147D312DE@GUREXMB01.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in the
sametime
Thread-Index: AcjyfLoHBIK7nqhUR8eu3CTBuPcv4wAXqN2wAEUT22A=
References:
<31F873353B13F2419C80FD0833E118951147D312DE@GUREXMB01.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM>
From: "Kevin Boyle"
To: "Deepak Bissa" ,
"Maxim Treskin" ,
Subject: Re: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in the
sametime
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Comments inline (to both emails in the thread). [KJBII]
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Deepak Bissa
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 3:05 AM
To: Maxim Treskin; megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in
the sametime
Hello,
In my view, MGC should set the mode to Inactive if it wants to play busy
tone. MGC was not able to complete the requested session and applied
busy tone. In such circumstances there is no need for keeping the
resources allocated at MG for the session.
[KJBII] The MGC doesn't have to do anything. It appears that you are
equating busy tone with some kind of call processing error condition.
This is not the only application of busy tone, and is an extremely
unwise assumption. MGs *must not* make assumptions about call
processing functionality and must do as they are commanded insofar as
possible.
However, I would like to know the specific scenario where MGC is setting
the mode to send/receive and applying busy tone in same packet.
[KJBII] This is irrelevant. The MG MUST set the Mode to SR *and* must
play out busy tone as requested. Keep in mind that per 7.1.11 Mode has
no effect on Signals anyway.
For second part of the query, as per protocol H.248.1 (V3) section 7.2:
" The descriptors shall be processed in the order in which they appear".
So, the media descriptor containing mode as send/receive and signal
descriptor for application of busy tone should be processed in order of
their appearance in the command.
[KJBII] While this is indeed true, the fact is that such a command is
not illegal, and must be followed. The MG cannot possibly know what is
leading the MGC to perform this action. All it can do is what it is
told to do: set Mode to SR and apply busy tone. The two are not
mutually exclusive.
With regards,
Deepak Bissa
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Maxim Treskin
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:48 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in the
sametime
Hello
Is it normal, when MGC sends me signal cg/bt and termination mode
send/receive in the same packet?
[KJBII] If by "normal" you mean "syntactically legal", then yes. If you
mean "a valid call processing function" that would depend upon the
scenario, the operating region and a number of other variables that are
up to the judgment of the MGC.
Which behaviour must be realised on this termination: switch TDM port of
termination to RTP or signal to it busy?
[KJBII] The MG must perform both actions.
Thank you
--
Maxim Treskin
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may
contain privileged or confidential information and should not be
circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended.
If you have received this message in error,please notify the originator
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified
that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or
disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no
responsibility forloss or damage arising from the use of the information
transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 1 10:27:31 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F93028C0FF;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5110828C0E6
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id Fb3z13jCYaR8 for ;
Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrtps0kp.nortel.com (zrtps0kp.nortel.com [47.140.192.56])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB6903A6A49
for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com (zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com
[47.140.202.51])
by zrtps0kp.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id
m71HQ2M16973; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 17:26:03 GMT
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:25:31 -0400
Message-ID: <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA416172E8B@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA416172D26@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in
the sametime
Thread-Index: AcjyfLoHBIK7nqhUR8eu3CTBuPcv4wAXqN2wAEUT22AAAvAewA==
References:
<31F873353B13F2419C80FD0833E118951147D312DE@GUREXMB01.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM>
<34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA416172D26@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com>
From: "Kevin Boyle"
To: "Kevin Boyle" ,
"Deepak Bissa" ,
"Maxim Treskin" ,
Subject: Re: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in
the sametime
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Actually, now that I think about it, the statement that Mode does not
affect Signals is in 7.1.7, LocalControl Descriptor rather than 7.1.11,
Signals Descriptor. Sorry for the confusion.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Boyle, Kevin (NCRTP:0Q10)
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 12:10 PM
To: Deepak Bissa; Maxim Treskin; megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in
the sametime
Comments inline (to both emails in the thread). [KJBII]
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Deepak Bissa
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 3:05 AM
To: Maxim Treskin; megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in
the sametime
Hello,
In my view, MGC should set the mode to Inactive if it wants to play busy
tone. MGC was not able to complete the requested session and applied
busy tone. In such circumstances there is no need for keeping the
resources allocated at MG for the session.
[KJBII] The MGC doesn't have to do anything. It appears that you are
equating busy tone with some kind of call processing error condition.
This is not the only application of busy tone, and is an extremely
unwise assumption. MGs *must not* make assumptions about call
processing functionality and must do as they are commanded insofar as
possible.
However, I would like to know the specific scenario where MGC is setting
the mode to send/receive and applying busy tone in same packet.
[KJBII] This is irrelevant. The MG MUST set the Mode to SR *and* must
play out busy tone as requested. Keep in mind that per 7.1.11 Mode has
no effect on Signals anyway.
For second part of the query, as per protocol H.248.1 (V3) section 7.2:
" The descriptors shall be processed in the order in which they appear".
So, the media descriptor containing mode as send/receive and signal
descriptor for application of busy tone should be processed in order of
their appearance in the command.
[KJBII] While this is indeed true, the fact is that such a command is
not illegal, and must be followed. The MG cannot possibly know what is
leading the MGC to perform this action. All it can do is what it is
told to do: set Mode to SR and apply busy tone. The two are not
mutually exclusive.
With regards,
Deepak Bissa
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Maxim Treskin
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:48 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] sendRecv and busy tone on physical termination in the
sametime
Hello
Is it normal, when MGC sends me signal cg/bt and termination mode
send/receive in the same packet?
[KJBII] If by "normal" you mean "syntactically legal", then yes. If you
mean "a valid call processing function" that would depend upon the
scenario, the operating region and a number of other variables that are
up to the judgment of the MGC.
Which behaviour must be realised on this termination: switch TDM port of
termination to RTP or signal to it busy?
[KJBII] The MG must perform both actions.
Thank you
--
Maxim Treskin
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may
contain privileged or confidential information and should not be
circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended.
If you have received this message in error,please notify the originator
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified
that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or
disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no
responsibility forloss or damage arising from the use of the information
transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 3 12:22:48 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 359EE3A6C2F;
Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74ABA3A6C2F
for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id sk5DlM7OmU92 for ;
Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from s87.loopia.se (s87.loopia.se [194.9.94.113])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 122093A684D
for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:22:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 78147 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2008 19:23:13 -0000
Received: from s34.loopia.se (HELO s42.loopia.se) ([194.9.94.70])
(envelope-sender )
by s87.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP
for ; 3 Aug 2008 19:23:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 7229 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2008 19:23:05 -0000
Received: from h16n1fls34o265.telia.com (HELO GunnarH)
(gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se@[213.64.232.16])
(envelope-sender )
by s42.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for ; 3 Aug 2008 19:23:05 -0000
From: "Gunnar Hellstrom"
To: ,
References: <9E07F8717FE8BC4FBAE6860F61EA6C1D017D2564@spsrvmail03.nec.br>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 21:23:14 +0200
Message-ID: <000a01c8f59e$60081740$211ea8c0@GunnarH>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To:
Thread-Index: AcjzHlbX44JHSdywS0qTp+nBMSbwuwAAS5kQAJ+rS7A=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
Subject: Re: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0921570300=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============0921570300==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000B_01C8F5AF.2390E740"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C8F5AF.2390E740
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
H.248.2 also has the details on fax detection / T.38 procedure.
_____
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
chaitanya.shubhachint@tektronix.com
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 5:13 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
Appendix III (H.248 call establishment procedure examples for
facsimile-capable media gateways) from T.38 Spec should have what you are
looking for. I am looking at draft in force (04/2007).
_____
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Andre Rosa Stefanini
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 10:02 AM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] FAX on H.248/MEGACO
Hi,
I've been asked about something not clear on specs: When a MG receives fax
and/or modem tones on RTP port, it should change the codecs in order to
allow tones to be passed in a correct way to be decoded as a fax or modem in
the other side. There are some options (i.e. using G.711 or T.38). This way,
the MG which detected the fax tone must set up a new codec. For this, we
have two options: automatic or negotiated.
It's not clear on RFC which of these options is mandatory for the MG, or if
both of them. Could you help me with this?
Would someone could provide call-flows regarding fax/modem detection?
Thanks,
ANDRE
__________ NOD32 3311 (20080730) Information __________
Detta meddelande dr genomsvkt av NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.nod32.com
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C8F5AF.2390E740
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
H.248.2 also has the details on fax detection / =
T.38=20
procedure.
Appendix III (H.248 =
call=20
establishment procedure examples for facsimile-capable media gateways) =
from T.38=20
Spec should have what you are looking for. I am looking at draft in =
force=20
(04/2007).
Hi,
I’ve been asked =
about something not=20
clear on specs: When a MG receives fax and/or modem tones on RTP port, =
it should=20
change the codecs in order to allow tones to be passed in a correct way =
to be=20
decoded as a fax or modem in the other side. There are some options =
(i.e. using=20
G.711 or T.38). This way, the MG which detected the fax tone must set up =
a new=20
codec. For this, we have two options: automatic or negotiated.=20
It’s not clear on =
RFC which of these=20
options is mandatory for the MG, or if both of them. Could you help me =
with=20
this?
Would someone could =
provide=20
call-flows regarding fax/modem detection?
Thanks,
ANDRE
__________=20
NOD32 3311 (20080730) Information __________
Detta meddelande dr=20
genomsvkt av NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.nod32.com
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C8F5AF.2390E740--
--===============0921570300==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============0921570300==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 5 07:07:14 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098483A6A2C;
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B09F3A69BF
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 6r06LnrgPTot for ;
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og113.obsmtp.com (exprod7og113.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.179])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088263A6B20
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([66.129.228.6]) by exprod7ob113.postini.com
([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 07:07:09 PDT
Received: from p-emlb02-sac.jnpr.net ([66.129.254.47]) by p-emsmtp03.jnpr.net
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:07:09 -0700
Received: from emailfeemea1.jnpr.net ([172.26.192.140]) by
p-emlb02-sac.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:07:08 -0700
Received: from EMAILEMEA3.jnpr.net ([172.26.192.136]) by emailfeemea1.jnpr.net
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 15:07:06 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7235.2
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 15:07:06 +0100
Message-ID: <0E48B768805E4D44A70709C8AE092090023B902E@EMAILEMEA3.jnpr.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: H248.37 minor mistake in text referring to the figure.
Thread-Index: Acj3BIrE14AEPawcSMO25l2U8F8ABA==
From: "Yossi Havusha"
To: ,
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2008 14:07:06.0748 (UTC)
FILETIME=[8B34C3C0:01C8F704]
Cc: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] H248.37 minor mistake in text referring to the figure.
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1208468548=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1208468548==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8F704.8B03DC82"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F704.8B03DC82
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
=20
While reading the recent H248.37-200806 IP NAPT traversal package PDF, I
believe I found a minor mistake in the reference to the figures in the
text.
=20
6.6.1 NAPT traversal processing: 'OFF' mode ( page 11 )=20
Refers to figure 1 while it should refer the reader to figure 2.
=20
6.6.2 NAPT traversal processing: 'LATCH' mode ( page 12 )
Refers to figure 2 while it should refer the reader to figure 3
=20
=20
Thanks,
Yossi.
=20
=20
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F704.8B03DC82
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
While reading the recent H248.37-200806 IP NAPT =
traversal
package PDF, I believe I found a =
minor
mistake in the reference to the figures in the =
text.
6.6.1 NAPT traversal =
processing: ‘OFF’
mode ( page 11 )
Refers to figure 1 while it should refer the reader =
to
figure 2.
6.6.2 NAPT traversal =
processing: ‘LATCH’
mode ( page 12 )
Refers to figure 2 while it should refer the reader =
to
figure 3
Thanks,
Yossi.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8F704.8B03DC82--
--===============1208468548==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1208468548==--
From megaclau@virgilio.it Tue Aug 5 19:18:01 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 706D43A6B4C
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -81.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-81.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_60=1, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765,
FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426,
HELO_EQ_RU=0.595, HOST_EQ_RU=0.875, HTML_EXTRA_CLOSE=2.809,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96,
RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1,
SARE_UNI=0.591, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 1oxDT2OBtFk8
for ;
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip-187-085-101-092.pools.atnet.ru (ip-187-085-101-092.pools.atnet.ru [92.101.85.187])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D531D3A6B0F
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Return: allowed
X-Mailer: CME-V6.5.4.3; MSN
Message-Id: <20080806091834.7687.qmail@ip-187-085-101-092.pools.atnet.ru>
To:
Subject: Angelina Jolie Free Video.
From:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Free Video Nude Anjelina Jolie
|
About this mailing:
You are receiving this e-mail because you subscribed to MSN Featured Offers. Microsoft respects your privacy. If you do not wish to receive this MSN Featured Offers e-mail, please click the "Unsubscribe" link below. This will not unsubscribe
you from e-mail communications from third-party advertisers that may appear in MSN Feature Offers. This shall not constitute an offer by MSN. MSN shall not be responsible or liable for the advertisers' content nor any of the goods or service
advertised. Prices and item availability subject to change without notice.
©2008 Microsoft | Unsubscribe | More Newsletters | Privacy
Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052
|
|
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 5 22:41:17 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B62E3A6820;
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 22:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265C83A6820
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 22:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.150,
BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id XzQoH+hbzFmM for ;
Tue, 5 Aug 2008 22:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.teledata-networks.com (mail.teledata-networks.com
[194.90.152.129])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 06BA63A6804
for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 22:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tndcmail.Teledata.Local ([10.1.100.59]) by eSafe SMTP Relay
1212568314; Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:39:35 +0300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 08:42:33 +0300
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <413FABF5DCE22849AF86F442E472B78B036664EC@xmb-sjc-219.amer.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Handoff initiated by new MGC
thread-index: AchcNkbCKN995JH3RTi5tg5XY/OC+gAKj43gAChZMCAAAdvKIAAASu3AJp7nFSA=
From: "Raphael Tryster"
To:
X-ESAFE-STATUS: Mail clean
X-ESAFE-DETAILS:
Subject: [Megaco] Handoff initiated by new MGC
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Suppose that an MG has two MGCs configured as primary and secondary, and
currently it has a control association with the primary MGC. The two
MGCs communicate with each other in a way that allows each to detect the
failure of the other quickly, much more quickly than the MG could detect
it by retransmission timeout. It would be efficient if the secondary
MGC, on detecting failure of the primary, could send SC Handoff to the
MG, instructing it "talk to me now". But I believe Megaco requires the
MG to reject such a message as unauthorized. This is really a failover
scenario, but Megaco doesn't allow it on the MGC side.
Am I overlooking something in Megaco that would allow a fast handoff /
failover?
Raphael Tryster
**********************************************************************************************
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the
named recipient(s) only.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do
not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
*** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals, and malicious content. ***
**********************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 6 00:32:42 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654243A6B24;
Wed, 6 Aug 2008 00:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA9643A6B24
for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 00:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.869
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.380,
BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id guxLDLn6wxG8 for ;
Wed, 6 Aug 2008 00:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.27])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88EE53A6820
for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 00:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.78])
by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m767XAcj026384;
Wed, 6 Aug 2008 09:33:10 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS23.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.53]) by
FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 09:33:09 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 09:33:09 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: MGC Takeover; RE: [Megaco] Handoff initiated by new MGC
Thread-Index: AchcNkbCKN995JH3RTi5tg5XY/OC+gAKj43gAChZMCAAAdvKIAAASu3AJp7nFSAAA+GAYA==
References: <413FABF5DCE22849AF86F442E472B78B036664EC@xmb-sjc-219.amer.cisco.com>
From: "Schwarz Albrecht"
To: "Raphael Tryster" ,
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2008 07:33:09.0920 (UTC)
FILETIME=[ACF8CA00:01C8F796]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13
Subject: [Megaco] MGC Takeover; RE: Handoff initiated by new MGC
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Raphael,
we've studied that potential MGC changeover scenario, too.
We've called it "MGC Takeover".
See
H.248.1 Version 4 - MGC Takeover
http://ftp3.itu.ch/av-arch/avc-site/2005-2008/0801_Seo/AVD-3213.zip
or
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/megaco/current/msg07739.html
There might be good reasons for such a scenario, like a deadlock
situation on MGC level.
Or: the optimization of service/network availability performance.
-Albrecht
> -----Original Message-----
> From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Raphael Tryster
> Sent: Mittwoch, 6. August 2008 07:43
> To: megaco@ietf.org
> Subject: [Megaco] Handoff initiated by new MGC
>
>
>
> Suppose that an MG has two MGCs configured as primary and
> secondary, and currently it has a control association with
> the primary MGC. The two MGCs communicate with each other in
> a way that allows each to detect the failure of the other
> quickly, much more quickly than the MG could detect it by
> retransmission timeout. It would be efficient if the
> secondary MGC, on detecting failure of the primary, could
> send SC Handoff to the MG, instructing it "talk to me now".
> But I believe Megaco requires the MG to reject such a message
> as unauthorized. This is really a failover scenario, but
> Megaco doesn't allow it on the MGC side.
>
> Am I overlooking something in Megaco that would allow a fast
> handoff / failover?
>
> Raphael Tryster
> **************************************************************
> ********************************
> IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose
> the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
> *** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals, and
> malicious content. ***
> **************************************************************
> ********************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Megaco mailing list
> Megaco@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 6 17:09:50 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4677E3A6B0B;
Wed, 6 Aug 2008 17:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414CD3A6B0B
for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 17:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.205
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.205 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[AWL=-0.459, BAYES_20=-0.74, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1,
RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id YhzgmfKygQTA for ;
Wed, 6 Aug 2008 17:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net
[203.16.214.145])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277B53A6B09
for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 17:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiwCAKnXmUh5LPsu/2dsb2JhbAAIrT0
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,317,1215354600"; d="scan'208";a="175977465"
Received: from ppp121-44-251-46.lns4.mel4.internode.on.net (HELO
[192.168.0.2]) ([121.44.251.46])
by ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2008 09:40:16 +0930
Message-ID: <489A3D5D.8020403@nteczone.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:10:05 +1000
From: Christian Groves
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yossi Havusha
References: <0E48B768805E4D44A70709C8AE092090023B902E@EMAILEMEA3.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <0E48B768805E4D44A70709C8AE092090023B902E@EMAILEMEA3.jnpr.net>
Cc: megaco@ietf.org, Albrecht.Schwarz@alcatel-lucent.de
Subject: Re: [Megaco] H248.37 minor mistake in text referring to the figure.
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Hello Yossi,
Thanks for highlighting the issue. I'll see if we can get that updated.
Regards, Christian
Yossi Havusha wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> While reading the recent H248.37-200806 IP NAPT traversal package* =
> *PDF, I believe I found a minor mistake in the reference to the =
> figures in the text.
>
> *6.6.1 NAPT traversal processing: =91OFF=92 mode ( page 11 ) *
>
> Refers to figure 1 while it should refer the reader to figure 2.
>
> *6.6.2 NAPT traversal processing: =91LATCH=92 mode ( page 12 )*
>
> Refers to figure 2 while it should refer the reader to figure 3
>
> Thanks,
>
> Yossi.
>
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 8 00:27:26 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81A833A6BEB;
Fri, 8 Aug 2008 00:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790683A6C0C
for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 00:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 8I0djKG8Bg8d for ;
Fri, 8 Aug 2008 00:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3943A69D9
for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 00:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.79])
by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m787RM2p027453
for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:27:23 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS24.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.55]) by
FRVELSBHS07.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:27:22 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:29:28 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Megaco Digest, Vol 51, Issue 5
Thread-Index: AcjuiKi3zdHIZNPxRH+gPecKYTEcmgKndSFQ
References:
From: "CHATURVEDI PRABUDDHA"
To:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Aug 2008 07:27:22.0919 (UTC)
FILETIME=[32F82370:01C8F928]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Digest, Vol 51, Issue 5
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Hi,
For interpretation of "0ef", "1ef", "2ef" etc.
[0-9]ef may be used .
Rest
following
"0", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9","e" , "f" will be
interpreted with your digit map "([0-9ef])".
Regards,
Prabuddha C
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of megaco-request@ietf.org
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:30 AM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: Megaco Digest, Vol 51, Issue 5
Send Megaco mailing list submissions to
megaco@ietf.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
megaco-request@ietf.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
megaco-owner@ietf.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Megaco digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Digit map syntax question (Maxim Treskin)
2. Re: Digit map syntax question (Sudhanshu Garg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:44:22 +0400
From: "Maxim Treskin"
Subject: [Megaco] Digit map syntax question
To: megaco@ietf.org
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hello
I have question about megaco digit map syntax.
Is digitmap, like "([0-9ef])" valid?
I use erlang OTP megaco stack, and it interpretes this digit map that
following numbers is valid:
"0ef", "1ef", "2ef" etc.
Is it right or there is error in megaco stack? I think that valid number
values must be:
"0", "1", "2", ..., "9", "e", "f"
Say me please, which method is right?
--
Maxim Treskin
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:35:25 +0530
From: Sudhanshu Garg
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Digit map syntax question
To: Maxim Treskin , "megaco@ietf.org"
Message-ID:
<5503041852BDE44CB8B85BFDA141E0FDC0EFFFA3@GUREXMB01.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
Range (two digits separated by hyphen can be expanded into all the
digits from first to last (inclusive both ends).
The digits inside square brackets represent the dialled digitmap symbol
that can be given at corresponding place.
So [0-9ef] means [0123456789ef].
Therefore it represents one of the following:
"0", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9","*","#"
Regards,
Sudhanshu.
________________________________________
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Maxim Treskin [zerthurd@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 11:14 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Digit map syntax question
Hello
I have question about megaco digit map syntax.
Is digitmap, like "([0-9ef])" valid?
I use erlang OTP megaco stack, and it interpretes this digit map that
following numbers is valid:
"0ef", "1ef", "2ef" etc.
Is it right or there is error in megaco stack? I think that valid
number values must be:
"0", "1", "2", ..., "9", "e", "f"
Say me please, which method is right?
--
Maxim Treskin
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may
contain privileged or confidential information and should not be
circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended.
If you have received this message in error,please notify the originator
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified
that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or
disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no
responsibility forloss or damage arising from the use of the information
transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
End of Megaco Digest, Vol 51, Issue 5
*************************************
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 14 12:34:14 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4D43A68A0;
Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3913A6C96
for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id UsdW2NJYSdZJ for ;
Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out003.iad.hostedmail.net (out003.iad.hostedmail.net
[209.225.56.66])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21DF13A6A80
for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from in002.clients.iad.hostedmail.net ([10.158.14.182]) by
out003.iad.hostedmail.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:14:55 -0400
Received: from [192.168.28.119] ([67.88.7.2]) by
in002.clients.iad.hostedmail.net with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:14:55 -0400
Message-ID: <48A324A0.2020005@broadsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:14:56 -0400
From: brent agnew
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080707)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: megaco@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2008 18:14:55.0463 (UTC)
FILETIME=[7CF49F70:01C8FD70]
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:34:13 -0700
Subject: [Megaco] polarity line reversal on seizure
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Hi,
I'm trying to understand what the benefits are of applying polarity reversal on seizure over simply
requesting offhook, ringing, and ringback when attempting termination. Is polarity reversal on
seizure implemented for symmetry with line reversal on answer? What are the drawbacks to supporting
line reversal on answer without line reversal on seizure?
Thanks,
-Brent
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 22 09:49:08 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30BB3A68DB;
Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1003A68DB
for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[AWL=-0.140, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id ZN7ShrK2ZYfi for ;
Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exchange.txpcorp.com (exchange.txpcorp.com [207.71.49.220])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601DD3A6768
for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4325
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:48:13 -0500
Importance: normal
Message-ID:
Priority: normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Problem in ADD request.
thread-index: AckEcpF9jmlXdfQCSLqMfE+IxYhgpwABEHiQ
References:
From: "John Wainwright"
To:
Subject: [Megaco] Problem in ADD request.
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1639546229=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1639546229==
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C90476.DDD17B3D"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90476.DDD17B3D
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=20
My apologies if this is repeated but I seem to be having issues trying
to post to the Megaco list
=20
If I get a message such as the following to create a new context and ADD
a specific termination into it=20
=20
C=3D${
A=3DAALN/1{
M{
O{MO=3DRC}},
SG{ALERT/RI{PATTERN=3D1}},
E=3D38463393{AL/OF{STRICT=3DFAILWRONG}},
}}}
=20
What should I return for the context ID if the line is already offhook
and should the termination get added to a new context?
=20
Should I return an error message for a specific context that was just
created with AALN/1 now in this context such as shown below, or should I
return an error message for the null context and the termination has not
been added to any context?
=20
REPLY =3D 65234524 {
CONTEXT =3D 5 {
ERROR =3D 540 { "Unexpected initial hook state" },
ADD =3D AALN/1
}
}
}
=20
Thanks
John
=20
****************************************
The information contained in this message may be confidential, =
privileged or protected from disclosure. If you have received it by =
mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your =
system; you may not copy, disseminate or disclose the contents of this =
message to anyone.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90476.DDD17B3D
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My =
apologies if
this is repeated but I seem to be having issues trying to post to the =
Megaco
list
If I get a message =
such as
the following to create a new context and ADD a specific termination =
into it
C=3D${
A=3DAALN/1{
M{
O{MO=3DRC}},
SG{ALERT/RI{PATTERN=3D1}},
E=3D38463393{AL/OF{STRICT=3DFAILWRONG}},
}}}
What should I =
return for the
context ID if the line is already offhook and should the termination get =
added
to a new context?
Should I return an =
error
message for a specific context that was just created with AALN/1 now in =
this
context such as shown below, or should I return an error message for the =
null
context and the termination has not been added to any =
context?
REPLY =3D 65234524 =
{
CONTEXT =3D =
5 {
=
ERROR =3D
540 { "Unexpected initial hook state" =
},
=
ADD =3D
AALN/1
=
}
=
}
}
Thanks
John
The information contained in this message may be =
confidential, privileged or protected from disclosure. If you have =
received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it =
from your system; you may not copy, disseminate or disclose the contents =
of this message to anyone.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90476.DDD17B3D--
--===============1639546229==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1639546229==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 22 12:39:25 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61F4A28C195;
Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BEF528C184
for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.115
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.115 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1,
RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id l81zDTWZr1VJ for ;
Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wipro-blr-out02.wipro.com (wipro-blr-out02.wipro.com
[203.91.198.75])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41EF528C162
for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: cb5bdd58-aedf6bb000000d37-d4-48af15bd8a25
Received: from blr-ec-aa01.wipro.com (unknown [10.201.18.41])
by wipro-blr-out02.wipro.com (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id
7C102558002
for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:08:37 +0530 (IST)
Received: from blr-ec-bh02.wipro.com ([10.201.50.92]) by blr-ec-aa01.wipro.com
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:08:37 +0530
Received: from BLR-EC-MBX02.wipro.com ([10.201.50.164]) by
blr-ec-bh02.wipro.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:08:37 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:05:30 +0530
Message-ID:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Problem in ADD request.
Thread-Index: AckEcpF9jmlXdfQCSLqMfE+IxYhgpwABEHiQAAXaWU0=
References:
From:
To: ,
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2008 19:38:37.0190 (UTC)
FILETIME=[ABDB1A60:01C9048E]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Problem in ADD request.
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2111219695=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============2111219695==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C9048E.ABBC82C5"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9048E.ABBC82C5
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi John,
I feel we should return an error with the termination in the added =
context. I have seen atleast one MG (Mediatrix Line GW, I believe) =
behave this way to an error with in an ADD command.
Thanks,
Sriram
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of John Wainwright
Sent: Fri 8/22/2008 10:18 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Problem in ADD request.
=20
=20
My apologies if this is repeated but I seem to be having issues trying
to post to the Megaco list
=20
If I get a message such as the following to create a new context and ADD
a specific termination into it=20
=20
C=3D${
A=3DAALN/1{
M{
O{MO=3DRC}},
SG{ALERT/RI{PATTERN=3D1}},
E=3D38463393{AL/OF{STRICT=3DFAILWRONG}},
}}}
=20
What should I return for the context ID if the line is already offhook
and should the termination get added to a new context?
=20
Should I return an error message for a specific context that was just
created with AALN/1 now in this context such as shown below, or should I
return an error message for the null context and the termination has not
been added to any context?
=20
REPLY =3D 65234524 {
CONTEXT =3D 5 {
ERROR =3D 540 { "Unexpected initial hook state" },
ADD =3D AALN/1
}
}
}
=20
Thanks
John
=20
****************************************
The information contained in this message may be confidential, =
privileged or protected from disclosure. If you have received it by =
mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your =
system; you may not copy, disseminate or disclose the contents of this =
message to anyone.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9048E.ABBC82C5
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
RE: [Megaco] Problem in ADD request.
Hi John,
I feel we should return an error with the termination in the added =
context. I have seen atleast one MG (Mediatrix Line GW, I believe) =
behave this way to an error with in an ADD command.
Thanks,
Sriram
-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of John Wainwright
Sent: Fri 8/22/2008 10:18 PM
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Problem in ADD request.
My apologies if this is repeated but I seem to be having issues =
trying
to post to the Megaco list
If I get a message such as the following to create a new context and =
ADD
a specific termination into it
C=3D${
A=3DAALN/1{
M{
O{MO=3DRC}},
SG{ALERT/RI{PATTERN=3D1}},
E=3D38463393{AL/OF{STRICT=3DFAILWRONG}},
}}}
What should I return for the context ID if the line is already =
offhook
and should the termination get added to a new context?
Should I return an error message for a specific context that was =
just
created with AALN/1 now in this context such as shown below, or should =
I
return an error message for the null context and the termination has =
not
been added to any context?
REPLY =3D 65234524 {
CONTEXT =3D 5 {
ERROR =3D 540 { "Unexpected initial hook =
state" },
ADD =3D AALN/1
}
}
}
Thanks
John
****************************************
The information contained in this message may be confidential, =
privileged or protected from disclosure. If you have received it by =
mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your =
system; you may not copy, disseminate or disclose the contents of this =
message to anyone.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9048E.ABBC82C5--
--===============2111219695==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============2111219695==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 28 20:57:29 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4443A6981;
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD1B3A6CB3
for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.184
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id UjjN6vnbrSQE for ;
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-mx06.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.122.233])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15CB53A6819
for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213])
by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id
m7SEVEOh015993 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:31:33 +0300
Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.23]) by
esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:31:14 +0300
Received: from ndebe102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.30.172.47]) by
vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:31:06 +0300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:01:04 +0530
Message-ID: <0654814572BA9A4CB2080D614F25697DB02861@ndebe102.NOE.Nokia.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Megaco working
Thread-Index: AckJGrOeiKhl9kdKRaeah6LuL4zdDw==
From:
To:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2008 14:31:06.0775 (UTC)
FILETIME=[B507B270:01C9091A]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:57:28 -0700
Subject: [Megaco] Megaco working
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0514552358=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============0514552358==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C9091A.B3EDB34C"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9091A.B3EDB34C
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi , can you please provide me MEGACO working documents
Regards
Dheeraj Varma
+919898049559
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9091A.B3EDB34C
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Megaco working
Hi , can you please provide me MEGACO =
working documents
Regards
Dheeraj Varma
+919898049559
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9091A.B3EDB34C--
--===============0514552358==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============0514552358==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 28 22:54:29 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D004C3A6810;
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C9643A6810
for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.352
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.352 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id lhM9W44qZKpX for ;
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0C23A67F9
for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS03.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs03.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.75])
by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m7T5ru87010101
for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:53:56 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS24.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.52]) by
FRVELSBHS03.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:53:56 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:56:09 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Action to be taken on "SV Restart - Reason 900"
Thread-Index: AckEcpF9jmlXdfQCSLqMfE+IxYhgpwABEHiQAUjZY8A=
X-Priority: 1
Priority: Urgent
Importance: high
References:
From: "CHATURVEDI PRABUDDHA"
To:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2008 05:53:56.0675 (UTC)
FILETIME=[A00FF130:01C9099B]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13
Subject: [Megaco] Action to be taken on "SV Restart - Reason 900"
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1504426764=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1504426764==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C9099B.9F5DDF55"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9099B.9F5DDF55
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
=20
Can any one suggest what action to be taken once we receive=20
SV method =3D restart=20
reason =3D 900" service restored"
on a Phy termination=20
and no timer running:=20
as stated in the doc H.248 "F.3.4 MG Service Restoration " -
The reason will indicate what action may be taken.
but I find no doc or discussion on functionality based on reasons.
=20
Will the behavior include
1. subtraction of the physical termination.
or
2. The call will be preserved.=20
=20
Generally decision are taken based on Method "restart", hence call is
released.
=20
Kindly suggest.
=20
BR
Prabuddha C
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9099B.9F5DDF55
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
Can=20
any one suggest what action to be taken once we receive =
SV method =3D restart =
=
reason =20
=3D 900" service restored"
on a Phy =
termination
and no =
timer=20
running:
as=20
stated in the doc H.248 "F.3.4 MG Service =
Restoration " =
-
The=20
reason will indicate what action may be taken.
but I find no doc or discussion on =
functionality based=20
on reasons.
Will the behavior include
1. subtraction of the physical=20
termination.
or
2. The call will be preserved.=20
Generally decision are taken based on Method "restart", hence =
call is=20
released.
Kindly=20
suggest.
BR
Prabuddha C
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9099B.9F5DDF55--
--===============1504426764==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1504426764==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 29 06:14:38 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CFA63A69B5;
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FB433A69B5
for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pq7pi8V1W7Ja for ;
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.236])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F763A695E
for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so775654rvf.49
for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to
:subject:mime-version:content-type;
bh=1r3uW7t7r9tL7d2Q6qZKcKVkLdalWYho3ZDTujtjRd4=;
b=xzEfASl3n+Uofx7uzCuV0y5Ip1foF0qz1rg17YJDM1sy3NIMX08Cj6l9W/zhnVhNON
TYJqhq9WdjmPpnVADDl0VSTZntYjPwVVk3d8zglFE+T6T/MrFZgQKzOiANOPiK5CPdJd
OrrZXlWsaHK64dWVcU6MZhWcGLoWjTNq6B2Sg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type;
b=IE4dNLo1x5rtUI5QHQSjeLKfQctacrkthHfHp+IYzT0flrAqKoaHz8tJvCj0GiFS+K
Z5r2syIKGmpRBQ7NXRo15u/YcErZhiwOgVgCCCIgjLGL8htv3DIqsXss6gxWRUkN2I/j
HkldBwalmccSFY6RkrldaXBTTqfyIT+By5i7c=
Received: by 10.141.153.17 with SMTP id f17mr1512408rvo.18.1220015679412;
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.28.7 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:14:39 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <91d266200808290614p386bcc11s2308e949c43cdfa1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:14:39 -0400
From: "NC Reddy"
To: megaco@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [Megaco] Question: Is any Spec/Product Available to SIP to MEGACO
Converter/Adaptor
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1985085505=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
--===============1985085505==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_19194_32965110.1220015679423"
------=_Part_19194_32965110.1220015679423
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi,
Is there any specification or the product available in the market for
"SIP" to "Megaco" protocol Adaptor/converter.
Requirement context is:
- Controlling the Media Gateway resources (i.e TDM and RTP) using SIP
protocol.
- Looking MGCF functionality in SIP Application Server(AS) context, Where
AS need to use the MG control functionality, for Handoff problem.
Regards
Channa
------=_Part_19194_32965110.1220015679423
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi,
Is there any specification or the product available in the market for "SIP" to "Megaco" protocol Adaptor/converter.
Requirement context is:
- Controlling the Media Gateway resources (i.e TDM and RTP) using SIP protocol.
- Looking MGCF functionality in SIP Application Server(AS) context, Where AS need to use the MG control functionality, for Handoff problem.
Regards
Channa
------=_Part_19194_32965110.1220015679423--
--===============1985085505==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1985085505==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 31 23:50:05 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D14B53A6A38;
Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DEF93A6A38
for ; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.236
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.236 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id IK7oVhasWBpM for ;
Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (colt-na5.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.5])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6B413A68AB
for ; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS04.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs04.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.76])
by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m816o3Ak001353;
Mon, 1 Sep 2008 08:50:03 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS23.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.56]) by
FRVELSBHS04.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Mon, 1 Sep 2008 08:50:02 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 08:50:01 +0200
Message-ID:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: H.248.x-series; RE: Megaco working
Thread-Index: AckL/vSq/2kCRqe+RpyM2Y+vyO8aHg==
From: "Schwarz Albrecht"
To:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2008 06:50:02.0942 (UTC)
FILETIME=[F5C0C5E0:01C90BFE]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.84
Cc: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] H.248.x-series; RE: Megaco working
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1484782833=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1484782833==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C90BFE.F5AB175E"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90BFE.F5AB175E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dheeraj,
=20
MEGACO standards are published in the ITU-T H.248.x-series:
=20
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/e
=20
The pdf file types are for free download.
=20
-Albrecht
=20
----------------
=20
[Megaco] Megaco working
________________________________
* To: >
* Subject: [Megaco] Megaco working
* From: >
* Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:01:04 +0530
* Delivered-to: ietfarch-megaco-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
=20
* Delivered-to: megaco at core3.amsl.com
=20
* List-archive:
* List-help:
* List-id: Media Gateway Control
* List-post:
* List-subscribe: ,
* List-unsubscribe:
,
* Sender: megaco-bounces at ietf.org
=20
* Thread-index: AckJGrOeiKhl9kdKRaeah6LuL4zdDw=3D=3D
* Thread-topic: Megaco working
________________________________
Title: Megaco working
Hi , can you please provide me MEGACO working documents=20
Title: Megaco working
Hi , can you please provide me MEGACO working documents=20
Regards=20
Dheeraj Varma=20
+919898049559=20
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90BFE.F5AB175E
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dheeraj,
MEGACO=20
standards are published in the ITU-T H.248.x-series:
The pdf=20
file types are for free download.
-Albrecht
----------------
[Megaco] Megaco working
=
Title: Megaco working
Hi , can you please provide me MEGACO =
working=20
documents
Title: Megaco=20
working
Hi ,=20
can you please provide me MEGACO working documents
Regards
Dheeraj Varma
+919898049559
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90BFE.F5AB175E--
--===============1484782833==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1484782833==--
From megaco-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 1 01:56:13 2008
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: megaco-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-megaco-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB773A680D;
Mon, 1 Sep 2008 01:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7CF3A680D
for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 01:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.794
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.794 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.442,
BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id JfvRsMl8Wfi7 for ;
Mon, 1 Sep 2008 01:56:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (colt-na5.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.5])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58FC13A67D0
for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 01:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com
[155.132.6.78])
by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m818tedA008105
for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 10:55:45 +0200
Received: from FRVELSMBS23.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.56]) by
FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Mon, 1 Sep 2008 10:55:42 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 10:55:39 +0200
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Action to be taken on "SV Restart - Reason 900"
Thread-Index: AckEcpF9jmlXdfQCSLqMfE+IxYhgpwABEHiQAUjZY8AAnRIAgA==
References:
From: "Schwarz Albrecht"
To: "CHATURVEDI PRABUDDHA" ,
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2008 08:55:42.0339 (UTC)
FILETIME=[83957530:01C90C10]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.84
Subject: Re: [Megaco] Action to be taken on "SV Restart - Reason 900"
X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Gateway Control
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1396078854=="
Sender: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: megaco-bounces@ietf.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1396078854==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C90C10.83502AE8"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90C10.83502AE8
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Prabuddha,
=20
you are right that Annex F is not going in down into more details, but I
would assume that behaviour (2) is aimed when using reason '900', which
indicates that the termination is 'InService' (IS) state again.
=20
This implies that the ServiceState was before "not IS".
=20
Whether the "call/session service" may be continued ("preserved") or
terminated is conditional, e.g. may
- dependent on the call phase (call establishment vs active call),
- period of "out-of-service" phase, or/and
- call service type.
=20
I would assume that the general case might lead to call/bearer (or H.248
Termination) preservation, but wouldn't exclude conditions where a call
release would be a more appropriate action.
This decision is up to the MGC, - and because this H.248 entity has
exactly the knowledge about above listed conditions.
=20
Such specific conditions are out of scope of Annex F/H.248.1 itself,
they could be rather detailed in H.248 profile specifications.
=20
And complementary:
ETSI 183 025 call independent procedures pointing more in the direction
of (2), - and not (1) (because a SUBTRACT procedures is not indicated)
-, but would exclude the option in supporting also (1).
=20
Regards,
Albrecht
=20
=20
________________________________
From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org]
On Behalf Of CHATURVEDI PRABUDDHA
Sent: Freitag, 29. August 2008 07:56
To: megaco@ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Action to be taken on "SV Restart - Reason
900"
Importance: High
=09
=09
Hi,
=20
Can any one suggest what action to be taken once we receive=20
SV method =3D restart=20
reason =3D 900" service restored"
on a Phy termination=20
and no timer running:=20
as stated in the doc H.248 "F.3.4 MG Service Restoration " -
The reason will indicate what action may be taken.
but I find no doc or discussion on functionality based on
reasons.
=20
Will the behavior include
1. subtraction of the physical termination.
or
2. The call will be preserved.=20
=20
Generally decision are taken based on Method "restart", hence
call is released.
=20
Kindly suggest.
=20
BR
Prabuddha C
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90C10.83502AE8
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Prabuddha,
you are right that Annex F is not going in =
down into=20
more details, but I would assume that behaviour (2) is aimed when using =
reason=20
'900', which indicates that the termination is 'InService' =
(IS) state=20
again.
This implies that the ServiceState was before =
"not=20
IS".
Whether the "call/session service" may be =
continued=20
("preserved") or terminated is conditional, e.g. may
- dependent on the call phase (call =
establishment vs=20
active call),
- period of "out-of-service" phase,=20
or/and
- call service type.
I would assume that the general case might =
lead to=20
call/bearer (or H.248 Termination) preservation, but wouldn't exclude =
conditions=20
where a call release would be a more appropriate =
action.
This decision is up to the MGC, - and because =
this=20
H.248 entity has exactly the knowledge about above listed=20
conditions.
Such specific conditions are out of scope of =
Annex=20
F/H.248.1 itself, they could be rather detailed in H.248 profile=20
specifications.
And complementary:
ETSI 183 025 call independent procedures =
pointing more=20
in the direction of (2), - and not (1) (because a SUBTRACT procedures is =
not=20
indicated) -, but would exclude the option in supporting also=20
(1).
Regards,
Albrecht
Hi,
Can=20
any one suggest what action to be taken once we receive =
SV method =3D restart =
=20
reason =3D 900" service restored"
on a =
Phy=20
termination
and no =
timer=20
running:
as=20
stated in the doc H.248 "F.3.4 MG Service =
Restoration " =
-
The=20
reason will indicate what action may be taken.
but I find no doc or discussion on =
functionality based=20
on reasons.
Will the behavior include
1. subtraction of the physical=20
termination.
or
2. The call will be preserved.=20
Generally decision are taken based on Method "restart", hence =
call is=20
released.
Kindly suggest.
BR
Prabuddha C
------_=_NextPart_001_01C90C10.83502AE8--
--===============1396078854==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
--===============1396078854==--