Subject: [Megaco] RE: call waiting signal type

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:27:55 -0500

Call wait patterns are generally replayed after a short amount of time (10
seconds in North America).  Note that this is not a repetition -- this is
actually a second distinct application of the signal.  There are several
feature scenarios where the second signal will not be applied -- if the
waiting party hangs up, or if the callee flashes, to name a couple.
 
As for the dt package, I believe the characterization of call wait tone as
timeout is erroneous, although previous attempts to fix it have been
rejected.  I wrote the alerting package to be local-variant unaware, leaving
it to the MG to be responsible for how the signals should be applied to its
terminations.  Note that most localities have more than one wait tone
pattern, to allow for assignable distinctive tones (similar to assigning
distinctive ringing patterns to different incoming callers).
 
I see no reason to use dt/cw if using alert/cw.  The alerting package
provides far more functionality than the dt package for both ringing and
call waiting.
 
Kevin

  _____  

From: Raphael Tryster [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 5:39 AM
To: Boyle, Kevin [NCRTP:3Z40:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: call waiting signal type

In draft_boyle_megaco_alerting_03.txt, the alert/cw signal has type brief,
whereas the standard signal dt/cw apparently has type timeout.  Is this a
matter of national protocol?  The description of alert/cw says "Call wait
patterns do not repeat".  In Israel, a call waiting signal consists of 3
short tones, repeated once a few seconds later.

If it is a matter of national protocol, does this mean that a particular
installation will use either alert/cw or dt/cw, but not both?

Raphael Tryster 

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

---

From: "Giyeong Son" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:54:59 -0500

Hi,

In order to support a pure IP based conference (i.e. with H.323 or SIP) with
MEGACO, is there any way to support or implement mixer in a conference
without using Topology Descriptors?

Regards,
Giyeong

---

From: "Giyeong Son" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:54:59 -0500

Hi,

Regards,
Giyeong