RE: ASP Capabilities value 0x2 of interworking field

"Prasad, Shashank S (Shashank)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sigtran
Message-ID <6117ACCB57BFD4118C0C00508BB1B920068D30B4@II3004EXCH001U>
Ilie,
I too have the same confusion and still continue to have. My understanding
on what the RFC 3332 said and NOT what it did NOT. And I believe that most
of the folks also have the same confusion esp. wrt IPSPs.

Even the 3GPP standards has recommended to use M3UA in a certain flavour,
which really do NOT fall in line, with the inputs from this mailing list.

And that's the reason I am pressing for the M3UA authors/contributors to
redefine IPSPs, to the least.

Hope someone is listening !!!

shashank


-----Original Message-----
From: Ilie Glib [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 7:09 PM
To: Prasad, Shashank S (Shashank)
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] ASP Capabilities value 0x2 of interworking field


Shashank, Brian,

If Brian's statement is not just a play, then why all these ASP, SGP,
IPSP definitions at all in SIGTRAN standards?

Ilie


On 12/19/05, Prasad, Shashank S (Shashank) <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> This is an important statement that defines IPSPs.
>
> And, if all of the SIGTRAN community feels the same, I feel that this
SHOULD
> be explicitly stated while defining IPSPs. This definition is completely
> missing from the specs and has led to a lot of confusion about the
> definition of IPSPs.
>
>
> The current definition states as follows, which is extremely confusing.
> The IPSP definition, from the specs, means that IPSP is similar to ASP
only
> (not SGP).
> And that it does NOT use SGPs while communicating with other IPSPs.
>
> The RFC 3332 has a seperate definition of IPSP, SGP and ASP as follows:
>
>   IP Server Process (IPSP) - A process instance of an IP-based
>   application.  An IPSP is essentially the same as an ASP, except that
>   it uses M3UA in a point-to-point fashion.  Conceptually, an IPSP does
>   not use the services of a Signalling Gateway node.
>
>   Signalling Gateway Process (SGP) - A process instance of a Signalling
>   Gateway.  It serves as an active, backup, load-sharing or broadcast
>   process of a Signalling Gateway.
>
>
> We should explicitly write that IPSP can be an ASP or an SGP.
>
>
> shashank
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Brian F. G. Bidulock
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 6:07 PM
> To: Ilie Glib
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] ASP Capabilities value 0x2 of interworking field
>
>
> Ilie,
>
> The signalling gateway capability, SS7 interworking and relay capabilities
> can be combined into any process (ASP, ISPS, SGP).
>
> --brian
>
> Ilie Glib wrote:
(Mon,
> 19 Dec 2005 13:17:19)
> > Brian,
> >
> > I am sorry I was not clear enough. My claim was
> >
> > Registration Request (REG REQ) cannot be sent from an SGP, therefore
> > the value 0x2 indicating signalling gateway capability is meaningless,
> > unless IPSP and SGP functions can be combined in one Signalling
> > Process.
> >
> > Can an SGP act as an IPSP?
> >
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Ilie
> >
> >
> > On 12/19/05, Brian F. G. Bidulock <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Ilie,
> > >
> > > Ilie Glib wrote:
> (Mon, 19 Dec 2005 12:39:07)
> > > > Brian,
> > > >
> > > > could you please answer the following questions
> > > >
> > > > 1) Can SG register via RKM? If not, why the value 0x2 that indicates
> > > > Signalling Gateway?
> > >
> > > You are confused.  0x2 indicates signalling gateway capability: i.e.,
> > > the registering node has an SS7 network interfaces and behaves as an
> > > SG when interworking to that interface.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 2) Is there any difference between capabilities 0x0 and 0x1 in SUA
> > > >
> > > >      0x0 indicates no interworking with SS7 Networks.
> > > >      0x1 indicates IP Signalling Endpoint (ASP), interworking with
SS7
> > > >         networks.
> > >
> > > Yes, one supports interworking with SS7 networks and the other does
not.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I was more after a definition of the Relay capability in SUA
> > > > framework. Although SUA RFC mentions Relay and describes it, the
> > > > definition of Relay is missing.
> > >
> > > See SCCP specifications for a definition of a relay node.
> > >
> > > --brian
> > >
> > > --
> > > Brian F. G. Bidulock
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://www.openss7.org/
> > >
>
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> [email protected]
> http://www.openss7.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
>
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.