Subject: [Megaco] Last Call On Four Documents

From: "Tom-PT Taylor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 16:41:22 -0400

I would like to declare List Last Call on the following documents:

   draft-manyfolks-megaco-caspackage-01.txt, Megaco/H.248 Basic CAS Packages
   draft-bothwell-megaco-mftonepkgs-02.txt, MF Tone Generation and Detection
Packages
   draft-boyle-megaco-tonepkgs-06.txt, Supplemental Tones Packages for
Megaco/H.248
   draft-ietf-megaco-naspkg-03.txt, Megaco/H.248 NAS Packages

The latter two documents have already had a last call, but were revised.
The tones package, in particular, had the Q.1950 packages stripped out in
response to IESG concerns.  The remaining packages are unchanged from
before, but the complete document is much shorter.  I have had one comment
that the phrasing of the document should state clearly that Q.1950 provides
a number of packages suitable for Megaco/H.248 use, to which these are a
supplement.

I will forward each document to the IESG at the later of October 24 or the
date all outstanding issues are resolved. 

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

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:00:23 +1000

G'Day,

Below are some questions on the CAS package from a colleague.

Cheers, Christian

COMMENTS TO H.248 CAS PACKAGE

These comments relates to draft-manyfolks-megaco-caspackage-01.txt

Section 4, introduction:
What is "feature group D (FGD) MF signalling sigle stage dialling". Does
it prevents overlap signalling?
Is feature group D a certain functionality package in north amerika
(like class 4, class 5 exchanges?)

What is FGD operator services ? Is it assistance operators or trunk
offering operators or call centers?

Section 5, 4th part:
"For some applications, CAS package provides all of the functionality
needed…". What is actualy meant with "some applications". Is
functionality missing for other applications ? Is R2 counted as other
applications ?

Section 6.3.4, Event name Clear back; and also section 7:
Is "robbed bit signalling digital interface interface" the same thing as
"bit stealing in TS16 in T1" ? It seemes to be something else knitted to
the on-hook condition on an access only ?

Section 6.6.1 Glare procedures:
Is glare exactly the same procedure as "double seizure" in R1/R2
specifications for ITU-T ? 

Section 8.4.1 Ringback:
Is this signalling to calling user from an assistance operator ? This is
not covered in ITU-T R1 Rec.

Section 9.3.1 Recall:
Is this the same as a reanswer signal from the called user. It seems to
be something else, since it is mentioned in the Operator services
package.

Section 9 general:
All the operator services and signals mentioned, are not specified in
ITU-T R1 and R2. Are they all related to american operator services. Why
is trunk-offering and cancelling missing, or is that the same as
"operator attached" and "operator released" ?

Section 15.1 Basic single-stage MF or wink start or immediate start:
"Wink start" and "immediate start" is not part of the ITU-T R2
signalling , where "seizure acknowledgement" signal is always used and
not part of ITU-T R1, where "Delay dialling and start dialling
(proceed-to-send) are used. "Wink start sounds like a signal used
nationally (or within a region).

No reference:
Is also CAS signalling system number 5 and 5bis covered by this draft.
Where are the key pulses for transit and terminating indication
specified? In R1 and C5 the KP is like a normal MF digit. Is it regarded
as a digit also in this specification?

In system C5 the line signals are compelled (like the register
signalling in R2). Is the intention that the MGW handles these compelled
cycles autonomuously?

Tom-PT Taylor wrote:
>    draft-bothwell-megaco-mftonepkgs-02.txt, MF Tone Generation and
> Detection Packages
> The latter two documents have already had a last call, but were
> revised.  The tones package, in particular, had the Q.1950 packages
> stripped out in response to IESG concerns.  The remaining packages are
> unchanged from before, but the complete document is much shorter.  I
> have had one comment that the phrasing of the document should state
> clearly that Q.1950 provides a number of packages suitable for
> Megaco/H.248 use, to which these are a supplement.
> 
> I will forward each document to the IESG at the later of October 24 or
> the date all outstanding issues are resolved.
> 
> Tom Taylor

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