RE: Multiple SCTP associations

Sergey,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Mikhailov [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 4:19 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: SIGTRAN
> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Multiple SCTP associations
>
>
> Tolga, Ilie,
> thank you for your valuable replies on the subject!
>
> Please let me know, if I misinterpreted your answers.
>
> 1.
> As far as I understand it, an SCTP endpoint, to say it strictly, may have
> only one SCTP association; and a signaling process may use multiple SCTP
> endpoints (and hence multiple SCTP associations) for communication with
> different signaling processes of one AS/SG.
[TOLGA]Yes.
>
> 2.
> Multiple SCTP associations between the same two signaling
> processes, while
> not prohibited, will require reinterpretation of SCTP-to-ULP
> events (to keep
> communication status and ASP states consistent across multiple SCTP
> associations), such as NETWORK STATUS CHANGE, COMMUNICATION
> UP/LOST/ERROR,
> RESTART and SHUTDOWN COMPLETE events (RFC2960).
[TOLGA]The protocol never intends to use multiple associations between two
signaling entities. If you follow that path -for some reason-, both sides
will need to agree on the chneges necessary to support that scenario, i.e.
it won't be a solution compliant with the protocol.
>
>
> Regards,
> Sergey Mikhailov.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tolga Asveren" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:33 PM
> Subject: RE: [Sigtran] Multiple SCTP associations
>
>
> > Sergey,
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf
> Of
> Sergey Mikhailov
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:39 AM
> To: SIGTRAN
> Subject: [Sigtran] Multiple SCTP associations
>
>
> Hi,
>
> It seems that multiple SCTP associations established between the same two
> signaling processes are not [explicitly] prohibited.
>
> 1.
> Is it legal for a signaling process to establish more than one SCTP
> association to the same AS/SG where these multiple associations are served
> by different signaling processes?
> [TOLGA]Yes, this is how host redundancy is achieved (I assume you talk
> about
> M3UA/SUA). There are multiple ASPs serving an AS, and multiple SGPs in a
> SG,
> and there is a SCTP association between each SGP/ASP pair -well, obviously
> it is not mandatory-.
>
> 2.
> Is it legal for a signaling process to establish more than one SCTP
> association to the same signaling process at the remote side?
>
> (I feel that the 2nd case may be reasonable only when the remote side does
> not support multi-homed SCTP endpoints.)
> [TOLGA]Multiple SCTP assocaitions between two etities will have problems
> with ASP state machine if you follow it strictly considering the state
> transitions associated with events from SCTP. This is easy to overcome
> with
> a some reasonable reinterpretation. OTOH, multiple SCTP associations won't
> be a replacement for SCTP multihoming support because SCTP multihoming
> provided network/NIC redundancy without loss/missequencing of messages.
>
> Regards,
> Sergey Mikhailov.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
>