Subject: [Megaco] Short and long keywords

From: Raphael Tryster <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:44:39 +0200

Does anyone have information on the prevalence of support for short versus
long keywords in existing Megaco MGs and MGCs?  Configurable?  Defaults?
 
Raphael Tryster

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

---

From: "Nurit Shenhar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:23:23 +0300

Hi Raphael

I have seen both formats supported in the application we are working
with; I think that short format is the more popular. Anyhow, I would say
that the best thing is to send in short format (more efficient, even
though less readable) and receive both.

Nurit

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Raphael Tryster
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:45 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Megaco] Short and long keywords

Does anyone have information on the prevalence of support for short
versus long keywords in existing Megaco MGs and MGCs?  Configurable?
Defaults?

Raphael Tryster

---

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:27:50 -0400

Readability is often a red-herring in choosing formats to send.  I know
people who can look at binary H.248 and decode it in their head.  Even
for the more mortal among us, there are plenty of tools around that can
decode H.248 messaging in either encoding in pretty short order, abating
the need for the protocol to be formatted in such a way that it is
"readable".
 
My personal feeling: Text encoders should send the most compact messages
possible.  This includes using short-form tokens and leaving out the
"pretty formatting" and any unnecessary whitespace. More characters
(even whitespace!) means more processing per message and less
throughput.
 
Kevin

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Nurit Shenhar
	Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 4:23 AM
	To: Raphael Tryster; [email-masked]
	Subject: RE: [Megaco] Short and long keywords

	Hi Raphael

	I have seen both formats supported in the application we are
working with; I think that short format is the more popular. Anyhow, I
would say that the best thing is to send in short format (more
efficient, even though less readable) and receive both.

	Nurit

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Raphael Tryster
	Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:45 PM
	To: [email-masked]
	Subject: [Megaco] Short and long keywords

	Does anyone have information on the prevalence of support for
short versus long keywords in existing Megaco MGs and MGCs?
Configurable?  Defaults?

	Raphael Tryster