Re: ASP Capabilities value 0x2 of interworking field

Shashank,

That is an M3UA IPSP, that cannot support relaying.  It is only point-to-point.
An SUA IPSP can support relaying.  So the statement is not universally applicable
to all UAs.  You will find this statement removed in the SUA RFC.

--brian

Prasad, Shashank S (Shashank) wrote:               (Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:20:07)
> 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
> 

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/