Re: Recommendation for SUA modifications

"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sigtran
Organization http://www.openss7.org/
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Lincoln,

Well let's ferret this out: what event causes this non-SS7 congestion?
Is it too many messages crossing the SCTP/SUA boundary?  Too many messages
for what component to process?  The SCCP-User?

Or shall we just say that the ASP Status is used to indicate local congestion
at an ASP without defining it at all?

SS7 congestion is well defined, but that is its failing.  It needs things like
point codes.  This "local ASP congestion" is much broader, far more applicable
to IP networks.  I think we need to remove the Routing Context from the ASP Status
message.  "Local ASP congestion" knows no Routing Context.  It is the ASP in
general that is congested, locally.  Yes, I will remove Routing Context from the
message.  So, the ASP Status will have:

     ASP Congestion       Mandatory
     Info                 Optional

and the ASP Status Qry will have:

     Info                 Optional

Then the ASP need only respond with one ASP Status when the SG sends one ASP
Status Qry.  This is good.  Actually do we need the Info field?  I suppose we
could make the ASP Congestion field optional as well (when absent it would indicate
no congestion).

--brian

Haresign Lincoln wrote:                      (Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:25:18)
> Brian,
> 
> The ASP congestion that I am referring to is the same congestion we have
> spoken about all along.  The SUA layer is detecting congestion.  I don't
> think I can specify this any clearer due to the fact that congestion
> detection is typically an implementation dependent feature.
> 
> The bottom line is that ASP is congested at a layer above SCTP.  What
> type of text are you looking for?  Actually, I think the text in the
> existing RFC is fine:
> 
>    The SUA layer at an ASP or IPSP MAY indicate local congestion to an
>    SUA peer with an SCON message.
> 
> Of course if the WG decide to go with a new message, we can change it to
> whatever the new message is.
> 
> Regards,
> Lincoln

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