Subject: Re: clarification

From: "Rosen, Brian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 07:35:51 -0400

Wasn't modem needed to accommodate H.324, where the multimedia
streams are encoded into a single data stream and then modulated
by a modem, so that you needed to have the modem specified before
you got to the streams?

Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Groves [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 12:14 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: clarification
>
>
> G'Day Tom,
>
> I agree the modem descriptor seems out of place and probably isn't
> needed. However can we really deprecate this in H248v2 and be
> backwards
> compatible?
>
> Cheers, Christian
>
> Tom-PT Taylor wrote:
> >
> > This is a leftover from Santiago, when we firmed up the set of
> > descriptors needed to describe a termination.  Mike Buckley had an
> > insight: let the descriptors form a hierarchy, describing the
> > termination from the physical layer upwards.  We didn't
> really follow
> > through on that thought, but the modem descriptor got left in the
> > schema more or less through oversight.  It's a bit late to
> delete it,
> > but maybe in H.248v2 it could be deprecated and replaced by
> a property
> > in another descriptor.
> >
> >      -----Original Message-----
> >      From:   Marc Mathew [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> >      Sent:   Thursday, April 06, 2000 8:06 AM
> >      To:     [email-masked]
> >      Subject:        clarification
> >
> >      Hi,
> >
> >         Can anyone please tell me what modem descriptor is used for.
> >      Should modem not be specified as a seperate package (NAS ?).
> >      Isn't modem a different kind of termination. Why is there a
> >      seperate descriptor for it.
> >
> >      Always,
> >      Marc
> >
> >      Send FREE April Fool's Greetings to your friends!
> >      http://www.whowhere.lycos.com/redirects/American_Greetings.rdct
>