Re: ASP Active
Ilie Glib <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Brian unavailability of a remote user part, which is something, "is made visible" by DUPU. Regards Ilie On 12/23/05, Brian F. G. Bidulock <[email protected]> wrote: > Ilie, > > Nothing "is made visible" by DUPU. DUPU (as UPU) signals only the > unavailability of a remote user part. It is the responsibility of > the MTP-User to test for remote user part availability. > > --brian > > Ilie Glib wrote: (Fri, 23 Dec 2005 12:26:28) > > Hello Shashank, > > > > M3UA should not have any knowledge of SCCP-Users, perhaps you meant > > something different in your statement below. M3UA knows whether SCCP > > is up and running, that is made visible by SG via DUPU, but it is not > > necessary to be visible on IPSP to IPSP interface (M3UA), since SI is > > not mandatory part of the RK, and RC in general is optional. Handling > > of SCCP-Users is up to SCCP layer, in your network scenario. > > > > Ilie > > > > On 12/23/05, Prasad, Shashank S (Shashank) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Stanislav, Tolga, > > > > > > Well, then that would mean that Layer Manager (LM) needs to keep track (or > > > be aware) of SCCP and applications over SCCP to initiate the ASP Active ie. > > > LayerN needs to be "aware" of the states of Layer N+2. > > > > > > The applications (SCCP-User) should have inherent ways to inform the peer if > > > it's NOT ready, OR to drop the incoming message. > > > And the peer -to-peer messaging between SCCP-Users, should take care of > > > invalid states of one another. > > > > > > shashank > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > [email protected] > http://www.openss7.org/ > -- Ilie