Subject: [Megaco] RE: Reg Property and Event IDs of H323 Bearer Control Pkg which extends H245 Package

From: "Arvind Charanyan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 15:08:49 +0530

Hi,

Does any body have any idea about how to proceed about in the case of
the H323 BCP Package since the property/event IDs of properties/events
in that package overlap with those of H245 Package which it extends?

Like in the case of most other extended packages, is it ok to proceed
with the H323 BCP Package by assigning the properties and events IDs
consecutively after the IDs of the base package?

Thanks and Regards,

Arvind  

________________________________

From: Arvind Charanyan 
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:36 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Arvind Charanyan
Subject: Reg Property and Event IDs of H323 Bearer Control Pkg which
extends H245 Package

Hi,

The specification for the H323 Bearer Control Package indicates that it
extends H245 Package version 1. But the property IDs and the Event IDs
are overlapping for the packages. Shouldn't the property and event IDs
of the H323 Bearer Control Package be continuation of that of the Base
H245 Package?

Can anybody throw some light on this issue?

Thanks and Regards,

Arvind 

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

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:07:58 +1000

Hello Arvind,

You are correct that there is an overlap between package h323bcp and 
h245. The problem properties from the h323bcp package are: fastconnect 
(0x0001), h245encapstatus(0x0002) and event: sepH245 (0x0001).

There two ways to fix the problem:
1) Renumber the properties to fastconnect (0x0003), H245encapstatus 
(0x0004) and event: sepH245 (0x0003).
2) Deprecate the package extension. e.g. change the line:

Extends: h245 Package version 1 (defined in this Recommendation)

to:
Extends: None.

Fix 1: would cause backwards incompatibility problems where people have 
implemented referring to h245 package elements by their ids rather than 
through the h323bcp package.
Fix 2: would cause problem where people only specify elements through 
the h323bcp package. Package reporting my also change.

Its the lesser of two evils but my feeling is that 2) would be the best 
solution. What are other people's thoughts?

As H.248.12 Amendment 2 is in the last call period it would be possible 
to include this into the amendment if there's some agreement forward.

Regards, Christian

Arvind Charanyan wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Arvind Charanyan
> *Sent:* Monday, July 02, 2007 4:36 PM
> *To:* [email-masked]
> *Cc:* Arvind Charanyan
> *Subject:* Reg Property and Event IDs of H323 Bearer Control Pkg which 
> extends H245 Package
>
> Hi,
>
> The specification for the H323 Bearer Control Package indicates that 
> it extends H245 Package version 1. But the property IDs and the Event 
> IDs are overlapping for the packages. Shouldn’t the property and event 
> IDs of the H323 Bearer Control Package be continuation of that of the 
> Base H245 Package?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>