Subject: [Megaco] Agenda For The Meeting

From: "Tom-PT Taylor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 12:06:50 -0400

Could I have suggestions for agenda items for the meeting?  Specific items
which should be discussed (preferably on the list, to start with) are:
 -- H.248v2: ground rules for content, process
 -- initial official work items for us under recharter
 -- issues with specific documents

Below is the current list of documents matching draft-*-megaco-*-*.txt on
the Internet Draft site.  I expect this list will grow in the next few days.
In particular, I've submitted an update of the NAS packages draft (and have
already noted a couple of discrepancies between the abstract and the body).
Please indicate any documents which are obsolete and can be taken off the
table.

draft-madhubabu-megaco-qospackage-00.txt
Megaco/H.248 QoS Packages

draft-taylor-megaco-enhalpkgs-00.txt
Megaco/H.248 Enhanced Analog Line Packages

draft-manyfolks-megaco-caspackage-00.txt
Megaco/H.248 Basic CAS Packages

draft-rosen-megaco-namepatterns-00.txt
Name Pattern Package for Megaco

draft-cutler-megaco-recvpkg-01.txt
MGC Recovery Package for Megaco/H248

draft-ietf-megaco-naspkg-03.txt (submitted)
Megaco/H.248 NAS Package

draft-boyle-megaco-alerting-02.txt
Enhanced Alerting Packages for Megaco/H.248

draft-cutler-megaco-mgc-cookie-02.txt
MGC Cookie Package for Megaco/H248

draft-boyle-megaco-tonepkgs-05.txt
Supplemental Tones Packages for Megaco/H.248
(Completed list Last Call)

draft-doyle-megaco-tonesmib-00.txt
Tones MIB for Megaco/H.248

draft-ietf-megaco-r2package-02.txt
Megaco/H.248 R2 Package

draft-bouwen-megaco-isdn-data-00.txt
Extensions to Megaco to support Data in an ISDN D-channel

draft-ietf-megaco-mib-02.txt
MEGACO MIB

draft-rosen-megaco-atm-package-00.txt
Megaco ATM Package

draft-bouwen-megaco-isdn-pack-01.txt
ISDN Package for Megaco

draft-bouwen-megaco-isdn-bcp-01.txt
Best Current Practice for Megaco-Sigtran Interaction in ISDN Acces...

draft-ietf-megaco-h248f-01.txt
H.248 Annex F (Fax, Text Conversation, and Call discrimination))

draft-madhu-megaco-callflows-00.txt
Megaco/H.248 Call flow examples

draft-levy-megaco-mgdiscovery-01.txt
Megaco/H.248 Media Gateway Resources Discovery

draft-bothwell-megaco-mftonepkgs-00.txt
MF Tone Generation and Detection Packages

I believe we should also consider:

draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-00.txt
Conventions for the use of the Session Description Protocol (SDP)f...

I draw your attention to:

draft-sijben-rtp-proxy-00.txt
RTP proxies for firewall traversal

Tom Taylor
[email-masked]
Ph. +1 613 736 0961 (ESN 396 1490)

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

---

From: "Madhu Babu Brahmanapally" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 14:25:40 -0400

HI Tom, All,
The following are few functionalities that can be added in Megaco.

1) From the recent mails exchanged, the MPLS support in Megaco (either
through SDP or some other means) needs to be addressed.
2) Invocation of Scripts from the MGC, on more than on termination (For IN
Capabilities).

I'm not sure whether these are already in the agenda!.

Regards
Madhubabu

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
Tom-PT Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 12:07 PM
To: 'megaco'
Subject: [Megaco] Agenda For The Meeting

Tom Taylor

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:54:05 +1000

G'Day Tom,

Seeing you invited us to start off discussion on the list on the items
below....

With regards to H.248v2 I think the main thing to consider is the time
frame. I believe the itention of approving H.248v2 in Feb2002 is so that
we can produce a relatively clean version of H.248. I think the
implementors' guide has gone a long way to improve the specification and
I think that a version 2 is needed to capture all these changes as well
as other improvements to make the protocol more efficient: ie. auditing
individual properties, transaction pending handling, package extension
of descriptors etc.. 

As for rules for content I'm not sure that we can mandate anything. My
feeling is that H248v2 shouldn't be for large amounts of completely new
functionality but its hard to preclude anything before seeing the idea.
I think its largely a process issue. I don't think any new functionality
should be presented to the February SG16 meeting that hasn't been seen
and agreed to before that time. I think the main thing which needs to be
agreed is a commitment to a february approval date. We can then work
backwards to see when documents should be ready for review etc.

With regards to the drafts list below do you intend to address all of
these at the meeting? I think looking at the MIB is worthwhile. Some of
the other drafts I don't think there's much of a point ie. >
draft-ietf-megaco-h248f-01.txt  as its already published as an Annex to
H.248. Perhaps its just worthwhile going through the Packages Supplement
and making people aware at the meeting what packages are out there?

Regards, Christian