example, setting up a multi-party conference with H.248 merely involves adding several terminations to a context. In case o MGCP, however, the MGC needs to establish several connections to a special type of endpoint called the conference bridge. Following are the main differences between Megaco/H.248 and MGCP: Standards documents ITU-T H.248 Recommendations ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1, Gateway control protocol: Version 3. ITU-T Recommendation H.248.2, Gateway control protocol: Facsimile, text conversation and call discrimination packages. ITU-T Recommendation H.248.4, Gateway control protocol: Transport over Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP). ITU-T Recommendation H.248.12, Gateway control protocol: H.248.1 packages for H.323 and H.324 interworking. ITU-T Recommendation H.248.15, Gateway control protocol: SDP H.248 package attribute. - Megaco Protocol Version 1.0, November 2000, (Standard Track) - Gateway Control Protocol Version 1, June 2003 (Obsoletes: RFC 3015) (Standard) See also Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) H.323 H.225 References External links ITU-T H-series Recommendations ITU-T Publication site where the H-series, including the H.248 Sub-series, Recommendations can be downloaded in PDF format free of charge. H.248.1 Base protocol specification . H.248 History MEGACO vs MGCP White Paper from Hughes Software Systems MEGACO 1st draft, IETF, April 1999] Protocols of Megaco and MGCP by Doug Allen at Dynamix VoIP protocols Internet Standards ITU-T recommendations ITU-T H Series Recommendations