Tolga,
>[TOLGA]I want to emphasize the difference between "node" and
>"process". A SIGTRAN node may act as different process types
>but from SUA point of view those are different entities. There
>is no doubt that one can have different process types in a
>signle node. In the light of this, are you saying that SUA is
>"process-type agnostic" because any type of functionality can
>be provided by any process type? Then, why do we have
>different process types?
I think that, for an implementation - an implementation can
support SGP, ISPS or relay node. The notion of a process,
IMO, is an implementation issue - different OSes may behave
different. A ISPS that supports relaying needs to indicate
that support, as not all ISPS will support relaying.
At least in writing the RFC, I assumed 'process' not to have
a normative value, but to try to capture the overall functionality
in a descriptive manner.
Do you feel that we need to be more precise about this? I don't
think that the 'process' has normative value in most RFCs.
thanks,
John
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.