gm/1 in different H.248 Profiles; Re: gm/sam syntax clarification.

To the "numbered unfree man",

just for information:
you are talking about a different H.248 Profiles.

Reinaldo:   package gm/1 in "ETSI_BGF/1" profile
You:        package gm/1 in "ETSI_GateControl/1"
profile

You referred procedural clause is not relevant for the first
profile.

But in case that the gm/1 syntax or semantic should be
enhance, then I'd
like that you submitt a correspondent change proposal
against draft
H.248.43 (note: this Recommendation contains draft gm/2 and
the
TISPAN-to-ITU transferred gm/1 packages).

-Albrecht



                                                            
                                                            
              
                      iAmANumber                            
                                                            
              
                      notAFreeMan              To:     
megacoietf.org                                             
                   
                      <philfillflipya         cc:             
                                                            
           
                      hoo.co.uk>               Subject:
[Megaco] gm/sam syntax clarification.                       
                   
                                                            
                                                            
              
                      26.03.2007 14:07                      
                                                            
              
                                                            
                                                            
              




On the subject of gm/sam, I noticed that a recent poster who
was asking a
gm/sam related question used the 20.20.20.20/24 syntax when
referring to a
gm/sam value.

ETSI TS 102 333 V1.1.2 (2004-2007) Annex B.2 describes
property id (sam) as
"Encoded as a DomainAddress as defined in ... H.248...,
annex B. "*" is
used as a wildcard for digits"

the ABNF is
   IPv4address = V4hex DOT V4hex DOT V4hex DOT V4hex
and
  V4hex = 1*3(DIGIT) ; "0" ... "255"

The same document in section 5.12.1 bullet 2,  also says
".. in an IPv4
environment...,except that a number of trailing digits may
be wildcarded".

question 1: Is 20.20.20.20/24 a valid specification for
gm/sam= ? what
about 20.20.20.20/23 ?

question 2: What should the "*" wildcarding result
in if the following sam
values are specified?
       a) 192.168.100.1*
       b) 192.168.100.11*

question 3: is there any reason why the "native"
H.248 ABNF syntax using
the propertyParm/parmValue/alternativeValue token(s) could
not be used for
gm/sam (as I believe it is for gm/spr). If this was allowed
then
gm/sam=[192.168.100.1:192.168.100.19] or
gm/sam=[192.168.100.110:192.168.100.119] could be used in a
similar way to
gm/spr=[1024:65535].

Thanks for any clarification,
Phil Ilett.

Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo!
Mail - quick,
easy and free. Do it
now..._______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megacoietf.org
https:/
/www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco





_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megacoietf.org
https:/
/www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco