Re: M3UA and SUA recommendations

Siu,

Siu Chai Tho wrote:                                                    (Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:47:33)
> 
>    Hello Brian,
> 
>    "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>    > [Stanislav Ivanovich] What specifications do tell you is how should
>    > signalling processes behave on the external protocol and what is the
>    > functionality the prcesses should contain. Internal structure of
>    > signalling processes is irrelevant for specifications.
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    > [Siu Chai Tho]I feel that you have misunderstood my question. I was
>    > trying to reassure that there are boundaries of a layer defined as
>    >  mentioned  in  chapter  1.6 of RFC 3868 and also in chapter 3.1 RFC
>    2719.
>    > I understand that implementations can do whatever they like and are
>    > not forced to use layers. However, what is the purpose of using the
>    > word layer when there is no layer intended ?
>    What would you call it then? We refer to all of these UA as SS7-User
>    Adaptation Layers. You don't like the word 'layer'? (You will find
>    it on every page.)
> 
> 
> 
>    [Siu  Chai  Tho]  Sorry  if  I  express  myself  wrong.  I  understood
>    Stanislav's  answer  in a way that a UA would not be layer definition,
>    but  only  definition of external behaviour. I think of UAs as defined
>    protocol  layers  (with boundaries as defined in chapter 1.6) and that
>    it's  current  best  practise  to  implement  layers  with the defined
>    boundaries. Is this true ?

Yes.

--brian

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