Gillian Wang | 5 Jul 07:46 2005
Picon
Picon

AuditValue

Dear megaco memebers,

My question is regard to step 19) and 20) of Appendix I of H.248.1v2.

As the ephemeral temination A5556 has already been added into context 5000
(step 15), does the MG only need to check the terminationID in the received
message or should the MG send error 433 instead of the current reply (step
20)? as I expect the message from MGC to be like
"context=5000{AuditValue=A5556{......}})".

Thanks for clarifications.

Regards
Gillian
Tamar Nemet | 5 Jul 08:26 2005

DTMF generation

Hello,
 
Can someone give me an example for a megaco message from MGC to MG asking for DTMF generation of 3,5,7  ?
 
Thanks,
Tamar
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
Kevin Boyle | 5 Jul 17:50 2005

RE: AuditValue

You are correct.  This is a typo.  I have corrected it in the draft
version of V3.

Kevin 

-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Gillian Wang
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:47 AM
To: megaco <at> ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] AuditValue 

Dear megaco memebers,

My question is regard to step 19) and 20) of Appendix I of H.248.1v2.

As the ephemeral temination A5556 has already been added into context
5000 (step 15), does the MG only need to check the terminationID in the
received message or should the MG send error 433 instead of the current
reply (step 20)? as I expect the message from MGC to be like
"context=5000{AuditValue=A5556{......}})".

Thanks for clarifications.

Regards
Gillian

_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
Kevin Boyle | 5 Jul 17:55 2005

RE: DTMF generation

!/3 [12.34.56.78]:2944
T=123{C=12{MF=term123{SG{SL=123{dg/d3,dg/d5,dg/d7}}}}}

________________________________

	From: megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Tamar Nemet
	Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:27 AM
	To: 'megaco <at> ietf.org'
	Subject: [Megaco] DTMF generation
	
	
	 
	Hello,
	 
	Can someone give me an example for a megaco message from MGC to
MG asking for DTMF generation of 3,5,7  ?
	 
	Thanks,
	Tamar
Kamitses, Jerry | 6 Jul 01:48 2005

Clarification on MG handling of Local & Remote Descriptors


A question has arisen during interop testing regarding the extent 
to which the content of Local and Remote Descriptors sent to an MG 
termination by the MGC are intended to limit the content of any 
Local Descriptor returned by that MG termination in a response message. 

The question concerns whether the Local Descriptor in the MG termination's 
response must always be a subset of the last Local Descriptor sent to that 
termination or whether there are circumstances where the MG termination is 
free to include additional information in the response Local Descriptor. 
For example, are there situations where the content of the Remote descriptor 
must or may effect the content of the Local Descriptor the MG returns? 

In particular, if the last received Remote descriptor contains information 
not present in the last received Local descriptor then is the MG free to 
use any/all of the Remote Descriptor contents in addition to the 
last received Local Descriptor when selecting the Local Descriptor to 
return?

Specifically, what are the rules regarding SDP media parameters in the response. 
If, for example, the Local and Remote descriptors 
sent to the MG are
     Local {
          v=0
          o=- $ 0 IN IP4 $
          c=IN IP4 $
          m=audio $ RTP/AVP 8
     },
     Remote {
          v=0
          o=- 0 0 in ip4 100.23.14.82
          c=in ip4 100.23.14.82
          m=audio 5000 rtp/avp 18 101
	    a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event
          a=fmtp:101 0-15
	} 

then can the MG choose to return the following Local Descriptor?
     Remote {
          v=0
          o=- 0 0 in ip4 98.14.23.123
          c=in ip4 98.14.23.123
          m=audio 6348 rtp/avp 18 101
	    a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event
          a=fmtp:101 0-15
	} 

Do dynamic payloads based on RFC 2833 handled require any special treatment 
in this regard? For example, if the Remote Descriptor contains a telephone-event
rtpmap and the Local Descriptor does not, then can the MG choose to include 
a telephone-event rtpmap in the Local Descriptor it returns?
Gillian Wang | 6 Jul 08:21 2005
Picon
Picon

AuditValue of Media descriptor

Dear Megaco members,

Can anybody clarify the following usage of auditValue command of Media
descriptor on different terminationID types?

1/ Context=1{AuditValue = physical terminationID {audit{media}}}
Response with TerminationState and Stream descriptor with only LocalControl
Descriptors inside;
2/ Context=1{AuditValue = ephemeral terminationID {audit{media}}}
Response with TerminationState and Stream descriptor with all LocalControl,
Local and Remote Descriptors inside;
3/ Context=-{AuditValue = ROOT {audit{media}}}
Response with empty media descriptor or
Response with TerminationState descriptor having all properties
(MaxNumberOfContexts, MaxTerminationsPerContext,
NormalMGExecutionTime, NormalMGCExecutionTime,
ProvisionalResponseTimerValue...) of Base Root package specified as
draft-ietf-megaco-callflows-04.txt?

Thanks
Gillian
Tamar Nemet | 6 Jul 11:07 2005

Reply for Service change restart with service change delay

Hello,
 
If the MGC is sending service change with service change delay to the MG , when should the MG send the reply to this message ?
immediately or only after the delay?
 
What can be the reason for sending service change with a delay ?
 
Thanks,
Tamar
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
Tamar Nemet | 6 Jul 11:10 2005

Error reply for message with CHOOSE for context id

Hello,
 
If the MGC send an ADD message with CHOOSE for the context id, and there is an error in the command parsing,
which reply should be sent by the MG ? with context id ? with CHOOSE ?
 
Thanks,
Tamar
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
Kevin Boyle | 6 Jul 16:54 2005

RE: Reply for Service change restart with service change delay

The response is sent upon completion of processing of the command, not
after the delay expires.

There are many reasons why you would want a delay.  Graceful is the most
common, where the delay indicates how long to allow the termination to
remain in context prior to forcing it out of service.  Scheduled
maintenance is one possibility here.

Kevin

________________________________

	From: megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Tamar Nemet
	Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:07 AM
	To: 'megaco <at> ietf.org'
	Cc: Mendelevich, Victoria [Business:TELRD:TELRD]; Mazorov, Rima
[Business:TELRD:TELRD]
	Subject: [Megaco] Reply for Service change restart with service
change delay
	
	
	 
	Hello,
	 
	If the MGC is sending service change with service change delay
to the MG , when should the MG send the reply to this message ? 
	immediately or only after the delay?
	 
	What can be the reason for sending service change with a delay ?
	 
	Thanks,
	Tamar
Kevin Boyle | 6 Jul 16:51 2005

RE: Clarification on MG handling of Local & Remote Descriptors

There is no requirement that the Local and Remote descriptors align.
This would allow for some interesting things, like asymmetric codecs.

The reality, however, is that many implementations do not like
asymmetric connections and will not be able to do such a thing.  This
being said, however, the MG may not choose to add things to SDP that are
not there.  If the MGC has specified a particular codec (8 in your
example) the MG may not add more codecs.  It is constrained by what is
in the description from the MGC.

If the MG can align the Local and Remote within the constraints that the
MGC has placed on the Local descriptor, that is certainly allowed and is
the prerogative of the MG.

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Kamitses, Jerry
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 7:48 PM
To: megaco <at> ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Clarification on MG handling of Local & Remote
Descriptors

A question has arisen during interop testing regarding the extent to
which the content of Local and Remote Descriptors sent to an MG
termination by the MGC are intended to limit the content of any Local
Descriptor returned by that MG termination in a response message. 

The question concerns whether the Local Descriptor in the MG
termination's response must always be a subset of the last Local
Descriptor sent to that termination or whether there are circumstances
where the MG termination is free to include additional information in
the response Local Descriptor. 
For example, are there situations where the content of the Remote
descriptor must or may effect the content of the Local Descriptor the MG
returns? 

In particular, if the last received Remote descriptor contains
information not present in the last received Local descriptor then is
the MG free to use any/all of the Remote Descriptor contents in addition
to the last received Local Descriptor when selecting the Local
Descriptor to return?

Specifically, what are the rules regarding SDP media parameters in the
response. 
If, for example, the Local and Remote descriptors sent to the MG are
     Local {
          v=0
          o=- $ 0 IN IP4 $
          c=IN IP4 $
          m=audio $ RTP/AVP 8
     },
     Remote {
          v=0
          o=- 0 0 in ip4 100.23.14.82
          c=in ip4 100.23.14.82
          m=audio 5000 rtp/avp 18 101
	    a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event
          a=fmtp:101 0-15
	} 

then can the MG choose to return the following Local Descriptor?
     Remote {
          v=0
          o=- 0 0 in ip4 98.14.23.123
          c=in ip4 98.14.23.123
          m=audio 6348 rtp/avp 18 101
	    a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event
          a=fmtp:101 0-15
	} 

Do dynamic payloads based on RFC 2833 handled require any special
treatment in this regard? For example, if the Remote Descriptor contains
a telephone-event rtpmap and the Local Descriptor does not, then can the
MG choose to include a telephone-event rtpmap in the Local Descriptor it
returns?

_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco

Gmane