From Ayush.Jain@ccpu.com Wed Oct 13 05:44:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9A33A6B14 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:44:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N-uB9tFgaUI4 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:44:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (sd-smtp.ccpu.com [65.44.201.8]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BAA73A6B0D for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:44:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB3A620A1B for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INMAIL.ccpu.com (inmail.ccpu.com [172.25.0.64]) by sd-smtp.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18EF187094 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INEXCHANGE.ccpu.com ([fe80::b509:6cad:a066:8e97]) by INMAIL.ccpu.com ([::1]) with mapi; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:16:43 +0530 From: Ayush Jain To: "megaco@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:16:41 +0530 Thread-Topic: Megaco Service change reply without version Thread-Index: Actq1ImUBv1k3POnQzyOYfOor1sDCwAAA+AQ Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BCDADD7BFE51844DA81E33EB574279F202B892E299INEXCHANGEccp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3216-6.0.0.1038-17700.007 X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.983-5.0-31-1 X-imss-scan-details: No--14.983-5.0-31-1 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:37:26 -0700 Subject: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 12:46:50 -0000 --_000_BCDADD7BFE51844DA81E33EB574279F202B892E299INEXCHANGEccp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi All, If MGW sends a service change request to MGC & MGC has to reply without any= descriptors(without version etc), then opening & closing bracket should be= there on root or not. Currently for me, opening & closing brackets are com= ing from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor & so Disconnect. ###########################Service Change coming from MGW TRANSACTION =3D 17008 { CONTEXT =3D - { SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { SERVICES { METHOD =3D RESTART, REASON =3D 901, VERSION =3D 2 } } } } msgLen =3D 206 MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] REPLY =3D 17008 { CONTEXT =3D - { SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { } } } msgLen =3D 103 So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get it clea= rly as per RFC. Regards, _Ayush --_000_BCDADD7BFE51844DA81E33EB574279F202B892E299INEXCHANGEccp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,

I= f MGW sends a service change request to MGC & MGC has to reply without any descriptors(without version etc), then opening & closing bracket should= be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening & closing brackets are coming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor & so Disconnect.

<= o:p>

###########################Service Change coming fr= om MGW

TRANSACTION =3D 17008 {

CONTEXT =3D - {

SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT {

SERVICES { METHOD = =3D RESTART,

&nb= sp; REASON =3D 901,

&nb= sp; VERSION =3D 2 }

}

} msgLen =3D 206

MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81]

REPLY =3D 17008 {

CONTEXT =3D - {

SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT {

}

msgLen =3D 103

So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not= ? I could not get it clearly as per RFC.

Regards,

_Ayush

--_000_BCDADD7BFE51844DA81E33EB574279F202B892E299INEXCHANGEccp_-- From tom111.taylor@bell.net Wed Oct 13 18:58:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9D5A3A6A94 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:58:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.564 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.232, BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eVu19OAkw6k7 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blu0-omc4-s17.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc4-s17.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.156]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 929D73A6A8B for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLU0-SMTP88 ([65.55.111.136]) by blu0-omc4-s17.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:00:01 -0700 X-Originating-IP: [76.70.78.127] X-Originating-Email: [tom111.taylor@bell.net] Message-ID: Received: from [192.168.2.17] ([76.70.78.127]) by BLU0-SMTP88.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:59:59 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:59:59 -0400 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ayush Jain References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2010 01:59:59.0782 (UTC) FILETIME=[81FA0C60:01CB6B43] Cc: "megaco@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 01:58:44 -0000 You shouldn't be working from any RFC. The official reference for the protocol is H.248.1 as published by the ITU-T. You can find it at http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/en On 13/10/2010 8:46 AM, Ayush Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > If MGW sends a service change request to MGC& MGC has to reply without any descriptors(without version etc), then opening& closing bracket should be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening& closing brackets are coming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor& so Disconnect. > > > ###########################Service Change coming from MGW > > TRANSACTION = 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT = - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE = ROOT { > > > > SERVICES { METHOD = RESTART, > > > > REASON = 901, > > > > VERSION = 2 } > > } > > > > } > > > > } msgLen = 206 > > > > MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] > > > > REPLY = 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT = - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE = ROOT { > > } > > > > } > > > > } > > > > msgLen = 103 > > So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get it clearly as per RFC. > > Regards, > _Ayush > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco From Christian.Groves@nteczone.com Wed Oct 13 19:47:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA943A685B for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:47:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.392 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.392 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.207, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FLiH8wzPtmEu for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quasar.websiteactive.com (quasar.websiteactive.com [202.191.61.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556183A67B8 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppp118-209-181-184.lns20.mel6.internode.on.net ([118.209.181.184] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by quasar.websiteactive.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P6DsD-0001dP-GH for megaco@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:48:53 +1100 Message-ID: <4CB66FDF.30600@nteczone.com> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:50:07 +1100 From: Christian Groves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco@ietf.org References:

In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - quasar.websiteactive.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - nteczone.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 02:47:45 -0000 Hello Ayush, The ABNF is: serviceChangeReply = ServiceChangeToken EQUAL termIDList [LBRKT (errorDescriptor / serviceChangeReplyDescriptor) RBRKT] The { } are within square brackets so if there's no descriptor information then they are not included. Regards, Christian On 14/10/2010 12:59 PM, Tom Taylor wrote: > You shouldn't be working from any RFC. The official reference for the > protocol is H.248.1 as published by the ITU-T. You can find it at > > http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/en > > On 13/10/2010 8:46 AM, Ayush Jain wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> If MGW sends a service change request to MGC& MGC has to reply >> without any descriptors(without version etc), then opening& closing >> bracket should be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening& >> closing brackets are coming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported >> Descriptor& so Disconnect. >> >> >> ###########################Service Change coming from MGW >> >> TRANSACTION = 17008 { >> >> >> >> CONTEXT = - { >> >> >> >> SERVICECHANGE = ROOT { >> >> >> >> SERVICES { METHOD = RESTART, >> >> >> >> REASON = 901, >> >> >> >> VERSION = 2 } >> >> } >> >> >> >> } >> >> >> >> } msgLen = 206 >> >> >> >> MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] >> >> >> >> REPLY = 17008 { >> >> >> >> CONTEXT = - { >> >> >> >> SERVICECHANGE = ROOT { >> >> } >> >> >> >> } >> >> >> >> } >> >> >> >> msgLen = 103 >> >> So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get >> it clearly as per RFC. >> >> Regards, >> _Ayush >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Megaco mailing list >> Megaco@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > From Ayush.Jain@ccpu.com Wed Oct 13 21:39:33 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 321193A685B for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:39:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.723 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.723 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.876, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nsimbKpgoqeI for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:39:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (sd-smtp.ccpu.com [65.44.201.8]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D935C3A68BB for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC2141883DA; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:40:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INMAIL.ccpu.com (inmail.ccpu.com [172.25.0.64]) by sd-smtp.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EEC71882D2; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:40:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INEXCHANGE.ccpu.com ([fe80::b509:6cad:a066:8e97]) by INMAIL.ccpu.com ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:11:44 +0530 From: Ayush Jain To: Tom Taylor Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:11:42 +0530 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Thread-Index: ActrQ6r44ApVW65tQu2nI04k3yE12AAFhAPw Message-ID: References:

In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3216-6.0.0.1038-17702.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--17.155-5.0-31-1 X-imss-scan-details: No--17.155-5.0-31-1 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No Cc: "megaco@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:39:33 -0000 Hi Tom, I got it. Actually I have checked in ITU - T H248.1 Draft. But still am not clear whether for below: {} are required or not. ABNF says:=20 serviceChangeReply =3D ServiceChangeToken EQUAL termIDList [LBRKT (errorDescriptor / serviceChangeReplyDescriptor) RBRKT] That means, if there is no error descriptor or service change reply descrip= tor, LBRKT & RBRKT are not required? Is it fine? Regards, _Ayush -----Original Message----- From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom111.taylor@bell.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:30 AM To: Ayush Jain Cc: megaco@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version You shouldn't be working from any RFC. The official reference for the=20 protocol is H.248.1 as published by the ITU-T. You can find it at http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/en On 13/10/2010 8:46 AM, Ayush Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > If MGW sends a service change request to MGC& MGC has to reply without a= ny descriptors(without version etc), then opening& closing bracket should = be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening& closing brackets are c= oming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor& so Disconnect. > > > ###########################Service Change coming from MGW > > TRANSACTION =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > > > SERVICES { METHOD =3D RESTART, > > > > REASON =3D 901, > > > > VERSION =3D 2 } > > } > > > > } > > > > } msgLen =3D 206 > > > > MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] > > > > REPLY =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > } > > > > } > > > > } > > > > msgLen =3D 103 > > So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get it cl= early as per RFC. > > Regards, > _Ayush > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco From Ayush.Jain@ccpu.com Thu Oct 14 00:32:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB49D3A681E for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:32:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.015 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.015 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.584, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ii7w4pcmNmUL for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:32:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (sd-smtp.ccpu.com [65.44.201.8]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7EF3A6822 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:32:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sd-smtp.ccpu.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D271883DF; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INMAIL.ccpu.com (inmail.ccpu.com [172.25.0.64]) by sd-smtp.ccpu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3591883DE; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:34:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from INEXCHANGE.ccpu.com ([fe80::b509:6cad:a066:8e97]) by INMAIL.ccpu.com ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:05:06 +0530 From: Ayush Jain To: "BEHAR ALDANA, RONALD (RONALD)** CTR **" , Tom Taylor Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:05:04 +0530 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Thread-Index: ActrQ6r44ApVW65tQu2nI04k3yE12AAFhAPwAAXwnmAAACbG4A== Message-ID: References:

In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3216-6.0.0.1038-17702.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--22.393-5.0-31-1 X-imss-scan-details: No--22.393-5.0-31-1 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No Cc: "megaco@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 07:32:54 -0000 Thanks Ronald. I got it. Regards, _Ayush -----Original Message----- From: BEHAR ALDANA, RONALD (RONALD)** CTR ** [mailto:ronald.behar_aldana@al= catel-lucent.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 1:01 PM To: Ayush Jain; Tom Taylor Cc: megaco@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Hi Ayush According to ABNF "Square brackets enclose an optional element sequence", s= o since the LBRKT and RBRKT are inside the Square brackets "[]" they are op= tional also and should only be included when any of the parameters in the l= ist is sent. Regards Ronald Behar Aldana=20 QACC EMEA TSO=20 Madrid (Spain) (0034 913305322) -----Mensaje original----- De: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de A= yush Jain Enviado el: jueves, 14 de octubre de 2010 6:42 Para: Tom Taylor CC: megaco@ietf.org Asunto: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Hi Tom, I got it. Actually I have checked in ITU - T H248.1 Draft. But still am not clear whether for below: {} are required or not. ABNF says:=20 serviceChangeReply =3D ServiceChangeToken EQUAL termIDList [LBRKT (errorDescriptor / serviceChangeReplyDescriptor) RBRKT] That means, if there is no error descriptor or service change reply descrip= tor, LBRKT & RBRKT are not required? Is it fine? Regards, _Ayush -----Original Message----- From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom111.taylor@bell.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:30 AM To: Ayush Jain Cc: megaco@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version You shouldn't be working from any RFC. The official reference for the=20 protocol is H.248.1 as published by the ITU-T. You can find it at http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/en On 13/10/2010 8:46 AM, Ayush Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > If MGW sends a service change request to MGC& MGC has to reply without a= ny descriptors(without version etc), then opening& closing bracket should = be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening& closing brackets are c= oming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor& so Disconnect. > > > ###########################Service Change coming from MGW > > TRANSACTION =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > > > SERVICES { METHOD =3D RESTART, > > > > REASON =3D 901, > > > > VERSION =3D 2 } > > } > > > > } > > > > } msgLen =3D 206 > > > > MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] > > > > REPLY =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > } > > > > } > > > > } > > > > msgLen =3D 103 > > So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get it cl= early as per RFC. > > Regards, > _Ayush > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco _______________________________________________ Megaco mailing list Megaco@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco From ronald.behar_aldana@alcatel-lucent.com Thu Oct 14 00:30:25 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F9873A68C7 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:30:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kPSfomr2DC98 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F6DE3A6822 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.64]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id o9E7UWNP020158 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:31:10 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.43]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.64]) with mapi; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:31:07 +0200 From: "BEHAR ALDANA, RONALD (RONALD)** CTR **" To: Ayush Jain , Tom Taylor Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:31:05 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Thread-Index: ActrQ6r44ApVW65tQu2nI04k3yE12AAFhAPwAAXwnmA= Message-ID: References:

In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: es-ES X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:51:11 -0700 Cc: "megaco@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 07:46:07 -0000 Hi Ayush According to ABNF "Square brackets enclose an optional element sequence", s= o since the LBRKT and RBRKT are inside the Square brackets "[]" they are op= tional also and should only be included when any of the parameters in the l= ist is sent. Regards Ronald Behar Aldana=20 QACC EMEA TSO=20 Madrid (Spain) (0034 913305322) -----Mensaje original----- De: megaco-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de A= yush Jain Enviado el: jueves, 14 de octubre de 2010 6:42 Para: Tom Taylor CC: megaco@ietf.org Asunto: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version Hi Tom, I got it. Actually I have checked in ITU - T H248.1 Draft. But still am not clear whether for below: {} are required or not. ABNF says:=20 serviceChangeReply =3D ServiceChangeToken EQUAL termIDList [LBRKT (errorDescriptor / serviceChangeReplyDescriptor) RBRKT] That means, if there is no error descriptor or service change reply descrip= tor, LBRKT & RBRKT are not required? Is it fine? Regards, _Ayush -----Original Message----- From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom111.taylor@bell.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:30 AM To: Ayush Jain Cc: megaco@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Megaco] Megaco Service change reply without version You shouldn't be working from any RFC. The official reference for the=20 protocol is H.248.1 as published by the ITU-T. You can find it at http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H/en On 13/10/2010 8:46 AM, Ayush Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > If MGW sends a service change request to MGC& MGC has to reply without a= ny descriptors(without version etc), then opening& closing bracket should = be there on root or not. Currently for me, opening& closing brackets are c= oming from MGC, so MGW is returning Unsupported Descriptor& so Disconnect. > > > ###########################Service Change coming from MGW > > TRANSACTION =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > > > SERVICES { METHOD =3D RESTART, > > > > REASON =3D 901, > > > > VERSION =3D 2 } > > } > > > > } > > > > } msgLen =3D 206 > > > > MEGACO/2 [10.128.254.81] > > > > REPLY =3D 17008 { > > > > CONTEXT =3D - { > > > > SERVICECHANGE =3D ROOT { > > } > > > > } > > > > } > > > > msgLen =3D 103 > > So now, whether {} is required after ROOT or not ? I could not get it cl= early as per RFC. > > Regards, > _Ayush > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco _______________________________________________ Megaco mailing list Megaco@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco