[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >
The extension in Version 2 is specified after h245SecurityMode, however in version 4 (11/2002) the extension is specified after fastStart field, can someone help on confirming the following syntax in v4:
Progress-UUIE ::= SEQUENCE
{
protocolIdentifier ProtocolIdentifier,
destinationInfo EndpointType,
h245Address TransportAddress OPTIONAL,
callIdentifier CallIdentifier,
h245SecurityMode H245Security OPTIONAL,
tokens SEQUENCE OF ClearToken OPTIONAL, cryptoTokens SEQUENCE OF CryptoH323Token OPTIONAL,
fastStart SEQUENCE OF OCTET STRING OPTIONAL,
...,
multipleCalls BOOLEAN,
maintainConnection BOOLEAN,
fastConnectRefused NULL OPTIONAL
}
Here is the answer that we received from the H.225 Rapporteur:
> From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:57 AM
> Subject: Re: Problem between the different versions of H.225.0
>
> This is a relatively old problem. The Progress-UUIE was actually introduced
> in H.323v2 and, as such, should have had the extension marker at the very
> end of the message. The editor simply made a mistake and it was corrected
> via the Implementers Guide in September 1998.
>
> There would have been no backward compatibility issues with version 1, as
> this data structure did not exist. However, there would be a problem for
> any implementer who implemented H.323v2 and failed to read the Implementers
> Guide that accompanied it.
The modules have been updated accordingly in the ITU-T ASN.1 module database:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/asn1/database/itu-t/h/h225-0/2000/index.html
--
Olivier DUBUISSON
france telecom R&D
DTL/TAL - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France t: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - f: +33 2 96 05 39 45 - http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/
