RE: Recommendation for SUA modifications

"Haresign Lincoln" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sigtran
Message-ID <849535E338E99741B7F7413F73253EDB0258B535@us-nj-mail1.comverse.com>
Brian,

1) if multiple ASPs or AS can use the same association, this is a
scenario where you wouldn't want to use SCTP flow control.

2) SCTP flow control would reduce or eliminate ALL traffic going to an
ASP.  It may be that you want to see management messages, but not data
messages.

3) Peer-to-peer flow control allows an SG to implement features such as
reducing traffic to a lower threshold.  Much of this might be
implementation dependent.  A congestion level of 1 would reduce traffic
by 25%, 2 - 50%, etc...  Or a congestion level of 1 would only let
through certain application contexts, or only new dialogs.  In any case,
all of this is really implementation dependent, but allows switch
vendors to implement unique/configurable features in their products that
will still interop with all other switches.

Regards,
Lincoln 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Brian F. G. Bidulock
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 10:46 AM
To: Tolga Asveren
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Recommendation for SUA modifications

Tolga,

What were the scenarios where SCTP flow control (arwnd) do not work?

Could you detail them?

I would like to capture them in my congestion draft.

--brian

Tolga Asveren wrote:                            (Fri, 14 Oct 2005
09:34:42)
> Brian,
> 
> On the big picture I agree with you that SSNM is meant to be used for 
> SS7 network management, hence SCON is supposed to be used for SS7 
> congestion procedures. OTOH, there is a need to notify congestion 
> status of ASPs to SG and right now it seems like we don't have a 
> solution -actually till now the supposed solution was relying on SCTP 
> congestion but there are scenarios where this is not enough/does not 
> work well-. I believe something needs to be done to address that
issue.
> a)Either a new ASPTM
> b) or overloading SCON
> 
>     Thanks,
>     Tolga
> 

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

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

______________________________________________________________________
  This email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-Secure and has
been found clean.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.