RE: M3UA - AS-PENDING with IPSP-IPSP
"Tolga Asveren" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
David, > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On > Behalf Of David Santos > Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 10:06 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Sigtran] M3UA - AS-PENDING with IPSP-IPSP > > > Hi, we have the following configuration depicted > below. Its an IPSP-IPSP communication. We have AS1 > served by ASP1. ASP2 and ASP3 are in the same > Application Server (AS2). Every ASP is operating in > Override traffic mode, where ASP1 and ASP2 are > configured to be in the ASP-ACTIVE state and ASP3 is > acting as backup. > > ________ ________ ________ > | | | | | | > | AS1 | | AS2 | | AS2 | > | PC = X | | PC = Y | | PC = Y | > |________| |________| |________| > | | | > ___|____ ___|____ ___|____ > | | | | | | > | ASP1 | | ASP2 | | ASP3 | > | IP@1 | | IP@2 | | IP@3 | > |Override| |Override| |Override| > |(Active)| |(Active)| |(Backup)| > |________| |________| |________| > | | | > |__________________|____________| > > When ASP2 turns Inactive, is the following scenario > correct? Or shouldnt ASP2 send AS-PENDING? Which > would be the correct sequence? Could be correct that > just the ASP receiving ASP-Inactive sends AS-PENDING > messages as a SGP would do? > > > ASP1 ASP2 ASP3 > | | | > |-------------------ASP Active----------------->| > |<----------------ASP Active Ack----------------| > | | | > |-------ASP Active------>| | > |<------ASP Active Ack---| | > | | | > |----------------NTFY(Alt ASP-Act)------------> | > | | | > |<-----ASP Inactive------| | > |----ASP Inactive Ack--->| | > | | | > |----NTFY(AS-PENDING)--->| | > |----------------NTFY(AS-PENDING)-------------->| > | | | > |<----NTFY(AS-PENDING)---| <== Is this correct? | > | | | [TOLGA]I wouldn't use a very strong language like "correct/incorrect" considering the advisory nature of NTFYs but for the scenario you described, it does not make sense to me IPSP2 to send NTFY(AS-PENDING), because it was IPSP2 which has issued the ASPIAC -probably due to an operator activity-. OTOH, sending it wouldn't be wrong either, it probably would trigger ASPAC to be sent from IPSP1 to IPSP2 and IPSP2 wouldn't reply back ASPAC-ACK -it probably would send ERR(ManagementBlocking)- > ... ... ... > ... ... ... > ... ... ... > > > Thank you all. > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > Renovamos el Correo Yahoo! > Nuevos servicios, más seguridad > http://correo.yahoo.es > > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >