Re: T.38 session name in examples
"Kevin Boyle" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.megaco |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA414F425FC@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com> |
I agree with Albrecht. MGs must craft compliant SDP. It is not the MGC's responsibility to modify non-compliant SDP from an MG into compliant SDP. MGs that omit required lines are non-compliant to both RFC 2327 and H.248.1. Kevin ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Schwarz Albrecht Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 3:36 AM To: RUIKAR RAHUL A; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Megaco] T.38 session name in examples Agree to Kevin, this was also made more explicit in the past in an IG ("In session descriptions sent from the MG to the MGC, the SDP must comply with RFC 2327. "). See also H.248.1 V3 Amendment 1. I may note that there are in the meanwhile many H.248 profile specification which defining default values for the SDP o=, s= and t= lines in MG-to-MGC directions. Thus, the T.38 H.248 examples are incorrect in my understanding. But implementers should implement the protocol, and not examples. (T.38 was never officially reviewed by Q.3/16 wrt H.248 examples (as far as I know)). ________________________________ From: RUIKAR RAHUL A Sent: Dienstag, 13. Mai 2008 05:10 To: Kevin Boyle; [email protected] Cc: Schwarz Albrecht Subject: RE: [Megaco] T.38 session name in examples Thanks for explanation.if "s" line is optional only in MGC->MG direction and not in MG->MGC but then I see that those attributes ( o,s,t ) are missing in reply from gateway. Now I have following doubt regarding this, 1) Should MG send RFC 2327 conformant SDP to MGC in reply ( eg. adding missing o,s,t lines ) 2) or is it MGC which has to manage these missing attribute and add it to SDP which is to be sent out to remote side. Example From Page No. 78 and 79 MGC to MG1: ==================== MEGACO/1.0 [123.123.123.4]:55555 Transaction = 11 { Context = $ { Add = DS0/1/1 { Events = 1 {al/on, ctyp/dtone } }, ; SCN termination prepared to listen for tones Add = $ { Media { Stream = 1 { LocalControl { Mode = ReceiveOnly, ReserveGroup = True, ReserveValue = True}, Local { v=0 c=IN IP4 $ m=audio $ RTP/AVP 18 0 v=0 c=IN IP4 $ m=image $ udptl t38 }; IP termination for audio } }}}} Reply from MG1 -> MGC ===================== MEGACO/1.0 [124.124.124.222]:55555 Reply = 11 { Context = 2000 { Add = DS0/1/1, ; SCN termination added Add = RTP/1 { Media { Stream = 1 { Local { v=0 c=IN IP4 124.124.124.222 m=audio 2222 RTP/AVP 18 0 ;MG1 supports both offered codecs a=ptime:20 } ; IP termination added }}}}} Regards, Rahul Ruikar Alcatel-Lucent Email: [email protected] Alcanet: 2721 4732 ________________________________ From: Kevin Boyle [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:38 AM To: RUIKAR RAHUL A; [email protected] Cc: Schwarz Albrecht Subject: RE: [Megaco] T.38 session name in examples This misconception continues to pervade, and it is worrisome. The s= line (and other mandatory portions of the SDP specification) are *NOT* optional in H.248. They are only optional in the MGC->MG direction. In communications from the MG to the MGC, the SDP must be conformant to RFC 2327. The text in Clause 7.1.8 is explicit that the exceptions to SDP are valid only in the MGC->MG direction. This is to allow the MGC to provide over- or under-specified SDP. Kevin ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of RUIKAR RAHUL A Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 6:07 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Schwarz Albrecht Subject: [Megaco] T.38 session name in examples Just an observation about ITU-T Rec. T.38 (09/2005) according to SIP RFC "s" line in SIP messages is mandatory, it is missing in examples given in document. Though for H248 this attribute is optional but for messages sent/received from/to SIP agent shall have session name attribute present. Regards, Rahul Ruikar Alcatel-Lucent Email: [email protected] Alcanet: 2721 4732 _______________________________________________ Megaco mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco