Re: SE-IPSP definition
"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Organization | http://www.openss7.org/ |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Tolga, Tolga Asveren wrote: (Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:33:22) > Brian, > > [..snip..] > > > > All SSNM messages are applicable to IPSPs. No change is required. > [TOLGA]I couldn't disagree more. Could you please tell why they are needed? Because they correspond to MTP-User primitives that need to be delivered to the AS, regardless of whether the AS is at an ASP or IPSP. To use your words, it is required by the "Application Logic" for the peer to be able to indicate things such as MTP-STATUS. --brian > > Availability of remote ends is managed by the state of AS. No it cannot in all cases. For example, if an entire PC RK is used between IPSP, the IPSP can use DUPU to signal the availabiltiy of individual user parts to the peer that cannot be accomplished with ASP activation state. Another case is where NA is used as a RK and multiple point codes are used at either end. I know that you do not agree with this arrangement, but there is nothing in the current spec forbidding it. > > As far as I can see only SCON has a use case, and hopefully with ASPCONG it > won't be necessary as well. They all have "Use Cases". --brian -- Brian F. G. Bidulock [email protected] http://www.openss7.org/