Subject: RE: ASN or ABNF

From: "Kaul, Bharat" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:25:13 -0700

Most implementations are text based. Also, there are specific port numbers
for text and binary (2944 and 2945) and MG is expected to communicate with
the MGC at the appropriate port.

- Bharat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sivakoti, Suresh [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 12:16 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: ASN or ABNF
> 
> 
> RFC-3015  section 7.2.1o specifies that MGC should support 
> both ASN and
> ABNF, where as MGs may support both. I intrepret this 
> statement as MGs does
> not need to support both formats, If they support either format.
> 
> In this case, how does MG lets MGC about the protocol 
> encoding/decoding it
> is currently using in the serviceChange Request ?.
> Is there a rule that says support for ABNF is mandatory for 
> MGs and ASN is
> optional or vice-versa. If there is no such restrction, then 
> what is the
> popular choice of  protocol encoding for MGs ?.
> Is there a possibilty that MG changes protocol encoding from 
> ASN<--->ABNF
> durinng active session ( without serviceChange request).
> 
> What are the current practices of implementing parser for 
> Megaco, is it one
> for text and one for ASN ?.
> 
> Is there any sample data available to evaluate parsers 
> implementation ?.
> 
> the above questions might have obvious answers but not for 
> me, as I just
> started to working on implementing a MGC.
> 
> Thanks for your support.
> 
> Suresh Sivakoti
>  
>