RE: Clarification in Loadsharing Traffic for 2+1 model

Saraswati,

Q1: This is an internal (or actually, a network architecture) implementation decision - you won't find an answer in the
RFC. A third option for this case, which you didn't mention, would be to send an SS7 msg back to the sender, indicating
that the destination is unavailable.

Q2: Again, the RFC is not intended to architect the entire network solution. This is an implemenation decision.

Barry Nagelberg
Adax, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Saraswati Bose
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 7:28 AM
To: Brian Bidulock; sigtran
Subject: [SIGTRAN] Clarification in Loadsharing Traffic for 2+1 model


Hi Brian,
Help in the below for TM=2 and redundancy=2+1

Q1:Three ASPs (ASP1,ASP2,ASP3) in 2+1 configuration serving an AS.
ASP3 in INACTIVE state.
ASP1 and ASP2 are in active state and handling traffic.

Now if ASP2 moves to inactive state then notify" insufficient ASP resources" is sent to ASP3.
In this situation if any ULP data is received at the SG for the AS what the SG should do???
Option1: Send data to ASP1?
                  OR
Option2: Buffer data until number of active ASPs=n?

Q2: What if after the above notification ("insufficieant ASP resources") is received at the AS end no ASP initiates
ACTIVE procedure? The RFC is ! not clear about it .

Saraswati.


Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping