Subject: RE: [Megaco] RE: Megaco Digest, Vol 16, Issue 15

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:48:43 -0400

MGCP is not a standard.  This is clearly stated in the opening text of
the RFCs.  If you will also note, MGCP is marked "Informational".

MEGACO is the IETF Proposed Standard, and H.248.1 is the ITU-T
Recommendation. (These are the same specs, with different boilerplate,
though the IETF document lags the ITU by a large time span.)

The biggest difference between the two is the connection model.  The
H.248 connection model is far more flexible and powerful, and lends
itself to many scenarios that MGCP is just not capable of supporting.
Packet-to-packet connections is a primary example, as is large
centralized conferencing (think 30+ conferees).  Because the packet
connections are linked to physical appearances in MGCP, there is a
limitation to what can be done.

The Topology descriptor within H.248 is another advantage.  It allows
for all kinds of interesting constructs that are just not within the
realm of possibility for MGCP.

Granted, there can be no end of kludges made to allow MGCP to support
the same kinds of connections that H.248 can, but why implement kludge
upon kludge when the support is natively present in an extremely elegant
fashion within H.248.

Kevin 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu (gsnaidu)
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 5:25 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Megaco] RE: Megaco Digest, Vol 16, Issue 15

All,

Thanks a lot for your responses.

In some documents available over net, it is mentioned that MGCP is a
proprietary (closed) standard which does not reflect any
standardization, though it is formally announced and supported from
IETF. This lead to interoperable issues.
Not sure why? MGCP is IP based, I suppose that IP based protocols can
quite do well in terms Of interoperability with other protocols for ex.
SIP and H.323. 

On the other side, MEGACO is a truly open standard supported from bodies
like ITU-T and IETF.

Any thoughts on the above comments?

Thanks,

Sreenivas

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:35 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Megaco Digest, Vol 16, Issue 15

Send Megaco mailing list submissions to
	[email-masked]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	[email-masked]

You can reach the person managing the list at
	[email-masked]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Megaco digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. ContextID All with terminationID All (Gillian Wang)
   2. benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
      (Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu (gsnaidu))
   3. Re: benefits of MEGACO over MGCP...... (B Venkat S.R Swamy)
   4. RE: benefits of MEGACO over MGCP...... (Aljaz Tomaz    ITWECP)
   5. Re: benefits of MEGACO over MGCP...... (jijo)
   6. Re: benefits of MEGACO over MGCP...... (B Venkat S.R Swamy)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:47:26 +1000
From: "Gillian Wang" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Megaco] ContextID All with terminationID All
To: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Megaco Members,

In section 6.3.3 of the latest H.248.1 Corrigendum1, there is a
statement "If there are no matches to the wildcarded ContextID and
TerminationID then error 431 is returned".

Suppose we had the following transaction received from the MGC:

TRANSACTION = 1 {CONTEXT = * {O-W-SUBTRACT = * {AUDIT { }}}, CONTEXT = -
{O-W-MODIFY = * {SIGNALS { }, EVENTS, EVENTBUFFER}}}

And currently no contextIDs existing in the MG, what error message
should be response? what level should we response, action or command
level? Please clarify which is the right response of the following four?

Reply 1/
Reply=1 {Context=* {SUBTRACT =* {error=431}}, Context=-{Modify=*}}

Reply 2/
Reply=1 {Context=* {error=411}}

Reply 3/
Reply=1 {Context=* {error=431}}

Reply 4/
Reply=1 {Context=* {SUBTRACT =* {error=411}}, Context=-{Modify=*}}

Regards
Gillian

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:56:47 +0530
From: "Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu \(gsnaidu\)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
To: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID:
	
<[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi,
 
I have working knowledge on MGCP with trunking gateways, but got a fair
amount of theoretical know-how on MEGACO.
 
I appreciate someone's response on the advantages of MEGACO over MGCP? I
am particularly looking at the kind of advantages of MEGACO, where it is
not possible to achieve with MGCP.
 
Thanks,
 
Sreenivas
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/megaco/attachments/20050822/64c50a18/atta
chment.htm

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:07:08 +0530
From: "B Venkat S.R Swamy" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
To: "Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu \(gsnaidu\)" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Message-ID:
	
<OFA11E1440.6E84756F-ON65257065.00240F6C-65257065.002506AD@flextronicsso
ftware.com>
	
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Hi

MEGACO is a powerful protocol and lends itself to meet all the
requirements of the existing telecom applications while creating new
opportunities for futuristic multi-media based services. It is therefore
emerging as the long-term solution for the MG-MGC interface. However,
today market has stable MGCP implementation. Currently, the industry
trend is to implement MGCP as a Gateway Control protocol and later move
to MEGACO.

For a detailed comparative report on the MEGACO-MGCP protocol kindly
refer the FSS(Earlier HSS) white paper at following link:
http://www.hssworld.com/hss_mindsystem/megaco_vs_mgcp.htm

regards
B Venkat S.R Swamy
Senior Technical Leader
Flextronics Software Systems
Phone:  +91-124-2455555 Extn 3620
Fax: +91-124-2455345
web: www.flextronicssoftware.com

             "Sreenivasulu

             Gurram Naidu

             \(gsnaidu\)"
To 
             <[email-masked]         <[email-masked]>

             m>
cc 
             Sent by:

             megaco-bounces@ie
Subject 
             tf.org                    [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over

                                       MGCP......

             08/22/2005 11:56

             AM

Hi,

I have working knowledge on MGCP with trunking gateways, but got a fair
amount of theoretical know-how on MEGACO.

I appreciate someone's response on the advantages of MEGACO over MGCP? I
am particularly looking at the kind of advantages of MEGACO, where it is
not possible to achieve with MGCP.

Thanks,

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

***********************  FSS-Restricted   ***********************
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software Systems
Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to
whom it is addressed. It may contain  privileged or confidential
information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other
than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the originator immediately.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are
strictly  prohibited  from  using, copying, altering, or disclosing the
contents of this message.  FSS  accepts no  responsibility  for loss or
damage arising from the use of  the information transmitted by this
email including damage from virus."

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:53:37 +0200
From: "Aljaz Tomaz    ITWECP" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
To: "B Venkat S.R Swamy" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Message-ID:
	<[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="ISO-8859-1"

Hi!
You have put very nice "marketing" words, but are there any technical
reasons to move from MGCP to H.248/MEGACO (what cannot be done in MGCP,
but can be done in H.248/MEGACO), except that H.248/MEGACO is prefered
choise for the industry in following years.

Tomaz

-----Original Message-----
From: B Venkat S.R Swamy [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 8:37 AM
To: Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu (gsnaidu)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......

Hi

MEGACO is a powerful protocol and lends itself to meet all the
requirements of the existing telecom applications while creating new
opportunities for futuristic multi-media based services. It is therefore
emerging as the long-term solution for the MG-MGC interface. However,
today market has stable MGCP implementation. Currently, the industry
trend is to implement MGCP as a Gateway Control protocol and later move
to MEGACO.

For a detailed comparative report on the MEGACO-MGCP protocol kindly
refer the FSS(Earlier HSS) white paper at following link:
http://www.hssworld.com/hss_mindsystem/megaco_vs_mgcp.htm

regards
B Venkat S.R Swamy
Senior Technical Leader
Flextronics Software Systems
Phone:  +91-124-2455555 Extn 3620
Fax: +91-124-2455345
web: www.flextronicssoftware.com

             "Sreenivasulu

             Gurram Naidu

             \(gsnaidu\)"
To 
             <[email-masked]         <[email-masked]>

             m>
cc 
             Sent by:

             megaco-bounces@ie
Subject 
             tf.org                    [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over

                                       MGCP......

             08/22/2005 11:56

             AM

Hi,

I have working knowledge on MGCP with trunking gateways, but got a fair
amount of theoretical know-how on MEGACO.

I appreciate someone's response on the advantages of MEGACO over MGCP? I
am particularly looking at the kind of advantages of MEGACO, where it is
not possible to achieve with MGCP.

Thanks,

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

***********************  FSS-Restricted   ***********************
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software Systems
Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to
whom it is addressed. It may contain  privileged or confidential
information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other
than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the originator immediately.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are
strictly  prohibited  from  using, copying, altering, or disclosing the
contents of this message.  FSS  accepts no  responsibility  for loss or
damage arising from the use of  the information transmitted by this
email including damage from virus."

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

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:14:03 +0530
From: jijo <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
To: Aljaz Tomaz ITWECP <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], "B Venkat S.R Swamy"
	<[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

Hi,

As we know that Megaco is evolved from MGCP, so Megaco is quite flexible
to adpat new features and easy to interwork with next genration
Protocols like 3G etc.
These are some of the benefits from Megaco..
1. Megaco is supported by ITU recommendation too, future development and
cooperation between ITU and IETF is clearly on H.248/ MEGACO. Megaco
defines lots of packages to support Protocol Interactions. Its quite
flexible to adapt new features.Where as evolution of MGCP has virtually
stopped after the RFC3435.

2. H.248 uses a flexible call model which isolates packet connection
from physical resource, and so allows complex connections and services.
Where as MGCP MGCP associate packet connection with physical resource
which make it only appropriate for TDM-TDM, TDM-ATM and TDM-IP
connections.

3.H.248 provides an authentication header for security, a feature not
supported by MGCP

4. Megaco Supports TCP and UDP as Transport Protocol where as MGCP
supports only UDP

5. Megaco provide a powerful mechanism for supplementary services (e.g. 
call waiting), multi-party conferencing and multimedia support.

Thanks
Jijo

Aljaz Tomaz ITWECP wrote:

>Hi!
>You have put very nice "marketing" words, but are there any technical
reasons to move from MGCP to H.248/MEGACO (what cannot be done in MGCP,
but can be done in H.248/MEGACO), except that H.248/MEGACO is prefered
choise for the industry in following years.
>
>Tomaz
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: B Venkat S.R Swamy [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 8:37 AM
>To: Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu (gsnaidu)
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi
>
>MEGACO is a powerful protocol and lends itself to meet all the 
>requirements of the existing telecom applications while creating new 
>opportunities for futuristic multi-media based services. It is 
>therefore emerging as the long-term solution for the MG-MGC interface.
>However, today market has stable MGCP implementation. Currently, the 
>industry trend is to implement MGCP as a Gateway Control protocol and
later move to MEGACO.
>
>For a detailed comparative report on the MEGACO-MGCP protocol kindly 
>refer the FSS(Earlier HSS) white paper at following link:
>http://www.hssworld.com/hss_mindsystem/megaco_vs_mgcp.htm
>
>regards
>B Venkat S.R Swamy
>Senior Technical Leader
>Flextronics Software Systems
>Phone:  +91-124-2455555 Extn 3620
>Fax: +91-124-2455345
>web: www.flextronicssoftware.com
>
>
>
>

>             "Sreenivasulu

>             Gurram Naidu

>             \(gsnaidu\)"
To 
>             <[email-masked]         <[email-masked]>

>             m>
cc 
>             Sent by:

>             megaco-bounces@ie
Subject 
>             tf.org                    [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over

>                                       MGCP......

>             08/22/2005 11:56

>             AM

>
>
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I have working knowledge on MGCP with trunking gateways, but got a fair

>amount of theoretical know-how on MEGACO.
>
>I appreciate someone's response on the advantages of MEGACO over MGCP? 
>I am particularly looking at the kind of advantages of MEGACO, where it

>is not possible to achieve with MGCP.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Sreenivas
> _______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>
>
>***********************  FSS-Restricted   ***********************
>"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software 
>Systems Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the 
>individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain  privileged or 
>confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any 
>purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this 
>message in  error, please notify the originator immediately.
>If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are 
>strictly  prohibited  from  using, copying, altering, or disclosing the

>contents of this message.  FSS  accepts no  responsibility  for loss or

>damage arising from the use of  the information transmitted by this 
>email including damage from virus."
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>_______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>
>
>  
>

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:23:46 +0530
From: "B Venkat S.R Swamy" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
To: jijo <[email-masked]>
Cc: Aljaz Tomaz ITWECP <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Message-ID:
	
<OF29FA23D4.3AF1069C-ON65257065.0029DB9D-65257065.002C0AB8@flextronicsso
ftware.com>
	
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Hi
      few more advantages mentioned inline below[FSS]

regards
B Venkat S.R Swamy
Senior Technical Leader
Flextronics Software Systems
Phone:  +91-124-2455555 Extn 3620
Fax: +91-124-2455345
web: www.flextronicssoftware.com

             jijo

             <jijoj@axestechno

             logies.com>
To 
                                       Aljaz Tomaz ITWECP

             08/22/2005 01:14          <[email-masked]>

             PM
cc 
                                       B Venkat S.R Swamy/HSS@HSS,

                                       [email-masked]

Subject 
                                       Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO

                                       over MGCP......

 

Hi,

As we know that Megaco is evolved from MGCP, so Megaco is quite flexible
to adpat new features and easy to interwork with next genration
Protocols like 3G etc.
These are some of the benefits from Megaco..
1. Megaco is supported by ITU recommendation too, future development and
cooperation between ITU and IETF is clearly on H.248/ MEGACO. Megaco
defines lots of packages to support Protocol Interactions. Its quite
flexible to adapt new features.Where as evolution of MGCP has virtually
stopped after the RFC3435.

2. H.248 uses a flexible call model which isolates packet connection
from physical resource, and so allows complex connections and services.
Where as MGCP MGCP associate packet connection with physical resource
which make it only appropriate for TDM-TDM, TDM-ATM and TDM-IP
connections.
[FSS] Examples are important Bandwidth control applications, NATing
where both the sides are ephemeral.
[FSS]

3.H.248 provides an authentication header for security, a feature not
supported by MGCP

4. Megaco Supports TCP and UDP as Transport Protocol where as MGCP
supports only UDP [FSS] Apart from this Megaco also supports ATM(SSCOP,
AAL5), Sigtran(SCTP,
M3UA) transports also which are backbone transport used in 3G and IMS
technology allowing ease of integration.
[FSS]

5. Megaco provide a powerful mechanism for supplementary services (e.g.
call waiting), multi-party conferencing and multimedia support.
[FSS]The Protocol features that enable above poweful mechanism include:
> greater flexibility on the allocation of the resources using 
> ReserveGroup
and ReserveValue properties
> Multiple Stream support and greater flexibility in controlling flow of
information using Topology descriptor
> Multi-Media support, allowing mixing through Mux Descriptor Complex 
> digit maps can be provisioned through Management actions which is
not possbile in MGCP.
> Support of Move command that enables servies such as Call waiting and
call transfer.
> Redundancy mechanisms are clearly defined in form of Failover and 
> Handoff
procedures in Megaco.
[FSS]

Thanks
Jijo

Aljaz Tomaz ITWECP wrote:

>Hi!
>You have put very nice "marketing" words, but are there any technical
reasons to move from MGCP to H.248/MEGACO (what cannot be done in MGCP,
but can be done in H.248/MEGACO), except that H.248/MEGACO is prefered
choise for the industry in following years.
>
>Tomaz
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: B Venkat S.R Swamy [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 8:37 AM
>To: Sreenivasulu Gurram Naidu (gsnaidu)
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over MGCP......
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi
>
>MEGACO is a powerful protocol and lends itself to meet all the
requirements
>of the existing telecom applications while creating new opportunities 
>for futuristic multi-media based services. It is therefore emerging as 
>the long-term solution for the MG-MGC interface. However, today market 
>has stable MGCP implementation. Currently, the industry trend is to 
>implement MGCP as a Gateway Control protocol and later move to MEGACO.
>
>For a detailed comparative report on the MEGACO-MGCP protocol kindly 
>refer the FSS(Earlier HSS) white paper at following link:
>http://www.hssworld.com/hss_mindsystem/megaco_vs_mgcp.htm
>
>regards
>B Venkat S.R Swamy
>Senior Technical Leader
>Flextronics Software Systems
>Phone:  +91-124-2455555 Extn 3620
>Fax: +91-124-2455345
>web: www.flextronicssoftware.com
>
>
>
>

>             "Sreenivasulu

>             Gurram Naidu

>             \(gsnaidu\)"
To

>             <[email-masked]         <[email-masked]>

>             m>
cc

>             Sent by:

>             megaco-bounces@ie
Subject

>             tf.org                    [Megaco] benefits of MEGACO over

>                                       MGCP......

>             08/22/2005 11:56

>             AM

>
>
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I have working knowledge on MGCP with trunking gateways, but got a fair

>amount of theoretical know-how on MEGACO.
>
>I appreciate someone's response on the advantages of MEGACO over MGCP? 
>I
am
>particularly looking at the kind of advantages of MEGACO, where it is 
>not possible to achieve with MGCP.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Sreenivas
> _______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>
>
>***********************  FSS-Restricted   ***********************
>"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software 
>Systems Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the 
>individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain  privileged or 
>confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any 
>purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this 
>message in  error, please notify the originator immediately.
>If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are 
>strictly  prohibited  from  using, copying, altering, or disclosing the

>contents of this message.  FSS  accepts no  responsibility  for loss or

>damage arising from the use of  the information transmitted by this 
>email including damage from virus."
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>_______________________________________________
>Megaco mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
>
>
>
>
>

***********************  FSS-Restricted   ***********************
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software Systems
Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to
whom it is addressed. It may contain  privileged or confidential
information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other
than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the originator immediately.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are
strictly  prohibited  from  using, copying, altering, or disclosing the
contents of this message.  FSS  accepts no  responsibility  for loss or
damage arising from the use of  the information transmitted by this
email including damage from virus."

------------------------------

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

End of Megaco Digest, Vol 16, Issue 15
**************************************

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

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

---

From: Flemming Andreasen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:28:32 -0400

I thought we would have tired of this same old song by now, but I guess 
I was wrong :-)

As is evident from the below, opinions on the two protocols differ, but 
few will argue that they are both solutions to the same problem and seem 
to work just fine in practice. In terms of actual deployments, MGCP is 
clearly the more common one.

In terms of standardization, PacketCable standardized the NCS and TGCP 
profiles of MGCP targeted for use with analog telephones and trunking 
gateways. Both of these have subsequently been turned into ANSI 
standards and ITU-T Recommendations (J.162 and J.171).

Once you start comparing the two protocols and get into sophisticated 
applications where the pros and cons of each can be debated endlessly, 
there is a good chance that you shouldn't be looking at either, but 
rather spend your time on SIP.

Hope this helps

-- Flemming