Subject: Event = ALL and Package E.6

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:56:08 +1100

G'Day, 

It has been brought to my attention that the correction 6.38 in the
implementors' guide has a side effect on the use of wildcarding events
ie. event=dd/*.

With the current clarification in the H.248 Implementors' Guide 6.38
which states that a DM must be specified on the setting of DigitMap
completion event. That means if you specify event=dd/* (to get all the
digits) you will get back an error and it won't be executed because you
don't have a DM.

Is this the desired behaviour event for event=dd/*?

Cheers, Christian

---

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:14:36 -0500

How does the requirement of a DM for the completion event affect the
specification of any other event in the package?  The restriction, from my
reading, applies solely to the dd/ce event, and not to dd/* or any other
event in the dd package.  I guess I don't see the problem here.

Kevin

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:42:01 +1100

Hello Kevin,

The dd/ce event is part of the dd/* request. So by issueing dd/* you are
also setting the DM completion event. See H.248 sect 7.1.14.8.

Cheers, Christian

---

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 11:23:02 -0500

Aha... You are correct.  I had never thought of dd/ce as being part of dd/*.
So, my question then becomes, "In what instance do we really want dd/* to
include dd/ce?"  If the answer is "never" or "rarely", then I propose that
wildcarded events do NOT include completion events, and that completion events
for digitmaps (in any package) must be explicitly requested.

This may be a slight deviation from the intent of wildcarding, but completion
events are a little different, since they are, effectively, an event 'bundler'.
This being the case, I really don't see my proposed restriction as being a
terrible stretch.

Kevin