S1-99304 it is associated with S1-99269 Hampton Court S1 Meeting May 10-12, 1999 From: Alan Cox Sent: 31 March 1999 04:47 To: kevin.holley@bt.com; Roger Tarazi Subject: FW: Regarding LS from TSG CN3 Kevin - many thanks Roger - I guess this could be sent to SMG1, with a copy to S1 for information.   Alan -----Original Message----- From: Norihiro Ishikawa [mailto:ishikawa@mml.yrp.nttdocomo.co.jp] Sent: 31 March 1999 03:03 To: kevin.holley@bt.com Cc: Alan.Cox@vf.vodafone.co.uk; kevin.holley@bt.com; nick@serdev.nttdocomo.co.jp; ishikawa@mml.yrp.nttdocomo.co.jp; nozawa@serdev.nttdocomo.co.jp; ian.harris@vads.vodafone.co.uk; Saeki Hidekazu; Katsuhiko_Yamagata@seeds.nttdocomo.co.jp; Junichiro_Hagiwara@seeds.nttdocomo.co.jp; Ryouko_Okigi@seeds.nttdocomo.co.jp; mmurata@cet.yrp.nttdocomo.co.jp; Kouichi_Sawai@seeds.nttdocomo.co.jp; kimura@serdev.nttdocomo.co.jp Subject: RE: Regarding LS from TSG CN3 Dear Kevin, At 6:02 AM +0900 99.3.29, kevin.holley@bt.com wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >Following a brief private discussion with Alan Cox it seems that it would be useful to have a private meeting among a few of us. The TSG meetings in Yokohama seem an ideal opportunity for this. It is important for the technical people to understand the proposed solutions on two levels: the service level and the technical level - this is in accordance with the structure of our working teams in 3GPP. Please accept my apologies if my earlier approach appeared difficult. It is not my intention to block or delay any proposals, just to enhance understanding and avoid duplication of effort. The TSG-T2 meeting in Yokohama is taking place at the Fuji View Hotel, 19-21 April. When might be an appropriate time for an informal meeting? NTT DoCoMo agrees with you that we will have an informal meeting for resolving issues on non transparent T.30-based fax, during the TSG-T2 meeting in Yokohama. NTT DoCoMo could do, if appropriate, the demonstration on T.30 based mobile fax machines using PDC, on April 20 or 21, at Yokohama. The service requirement from NTT DoCoMo (SMG1 DCC 128) is attached with this e-mail. Its summary is as follows. In Japan, real time non-transparent FAX service is provided based on T.30 protocol. Portable FAX products (50,000~60,000yen : US$400~500) are available for mobile users. Until now, 32,000 units were sold in Japan and it is increasing constantly. This fact has shown that real time non-transparent FAX service gained the wide market acceptance. As the same view as the operators in Europe, NTT DoCoMo plans to provide its users with the same and better services offered by UMTS/IMT2000 than in the second generation mobile systems. From the operator point of view, it is important to keep continue providing real time non-transparent FAX service. Since UMTS is the evolution of GSM, this service will be an enhanced based on GSM specifications. To this end, we believe that non-transparent FAX service should be retained in the GSM specifications. This service should be considered as an option left to the operators. I hope this helps you. Best regards, Norihiro Ishikawa Best Regards, Kevin Holley >> -----Original Message----- >> From:        Alan.Cox@vf.vodafone.co.uk [SMTP:Alan.Cox@vf.vodafone.co.uk] >> Sent:        Friday, March 26, 1999 5:14 PM >> To:  kevin.holley@bt.com; nick@serdev.nttdocomo.co.jp >> Cc:  ishikawa@mml.yrp.nttdocomo.co.jp; nozawa@serdev.nttdocomo.co.jp; >> ian.harris@vads.vodafone.co.uk >> Subject:     RE: Regarding LS from TSG CN3 >> >> Kevin >> >> This was discussed at some length in the last S1 meeting. The problem is >> that we were told that in Japan there are many miniature fax machines >> already used on the move, on PDC etc, and customers want to continue with >> using these, rather than our preferred option of using a laptop or similar >> device and making a data call. >> >> Thus techically our proposal is that in addition to the data call >> approach, >> which probably requires no further standardisation, we do want to be able >> to >> support a direct mode, both transparent and non-transparent, to connect a >> fax call with a DTE using T.30 protocols. >> >> Thus we propose a reference to GSM 03.45 and 03.46, but avoiding any >> further >> change as far as possible, since those specifications proved very >> difficult >> to optimise to work on GSM. >> >> I hope that you will find this agreeable. >> >>