RE: Recommendation for SUA modifications

Brian,

What the SG does is implementation dependent.  I'm not sure we should
specify it in the requirement.  Today, the RFC says:

   The SUA layer at an ASP or IPSP MAY indicate local congestion to an
   SUA peer with an SCON message.  When an SG receives a congestion
   message (SCON) from an ASP, and the SG determines that an endpoint is
   now encountering congestion, it MAY trigger congestion procedures of
   the relevant SCCP standard. 

Note the MAY.  In our implementation, we also take actions such as
diverting traffic to non congested ASPs.  But in any case, the RFC
ALLOWS the SCON from ASP to SG.  What the SG wants to do with it is up
the the SG.

Regards,
Lincoln

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 2:00 PM
To: Haresign Lincoln
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Recommendation for SUA modifications

Haresign,

Haresign Lincoln wrote:
(Thu, 13 Oct 2005 13:52:01)
> Brian,
> 
> There are some applications that do not need to process an N-PCSTATE 
> indication and they will work perfectly fine in the networks.  We are 
> experiencing no problems at all.  If you really want me to give you a 
> real example of an application that works without PCs, I can.

But this is the very indication that you are attempting to generate by
sending SCON from an ASP to an SG.  You are going to ignore it at the
other end.

> 
> Again, I'm am NOT trying to demand that anyone generates an N-PCSTATE 
> message.  I'm trying to use the SCON as described in the RFC today.  I

> want to indicate CONGESTION at an ASP (as described in the RFC).

And the SG will what?  Generate an N-PCSTATE at the remote that you
ignore.

--brian

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/

______________________________________________________________________
  This email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-Secure and has
been found clean.