Subject: Priorities and Relevance

From: John Hearty <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 16:04 -0500 (CDT)

Note this post on the megaco list for possible future work in mmusic.

Forwarded message:
_________________________________________________________________
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 09:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tom-PT Taylor <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Sender: "Media Gateway Control (megaco)" <[email-masked]>
Reply-to: Tom-PT Taylor <[email-masked]>
Subject: Priorities and Relevance

The feeling I get is that it won't hurt to focus our efforts for the next
few weeks on creating a draft which provides a consistent, implementable
audio-only version of the protocol, while preserving compatibility with
multimedia contexts.  Then we can spend July getting a joint H.GCP/Megaco
draft ready for the SG 16 Berlin meeting.

The items that need change to ensure compatibility with the ultimate
H.GCP/Megaco solution are:
- associating send/receive status with the medfia flows rather than the
whole termination, to allow finer control
- using MIME encapsulation when reporting capabilities in response to
audits, as Christian has suggested.  I'd like this to be present because I
think MMUSIC may eventually come up with a better solution to reporting
capabilities than SDP, yet one which maps easily to the latter or to H.245.

I'm assuming that for circuit terminations the bearer name is used as the
termination name (as it is now).  The bearer list is only needed if you
introduce the circuit multiplex termination class.  That should be a routine
extension of the basic protocol, without implications for MGs which don't
support it.