RE: SG view of the ASP

Hi,

 

I agree with Ilie. When ASP sent traffic mode as override it means SGP
have to choose this ASP, by overriding the previous one. This does not
apply that SGP need to loadshare the traffic. Again can we have SG
contained in two SGP with same network appearance? 

 

 

Regards,

Shelesh

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Ilie Glib
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:58 AM
To: Munnaluru, Krishna
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP

 

Hello Krishna,

 

This kind of behaviour from the SG means that the SGPs in the SG act

in active/standby mode while your ASP acts in override mode.

 

You expect the behaviour where the SG supports loadsharing mode for

its SGPs and override mode for remote ASPs.

 

Regards

 

Ilie

 

On 2/9/06, Munnaluru, Krishna <[email protected]> wrote:

> Brian,

> 

> This is how it is affecting my expected behavior.

> 

> Note: Currently I have only one ASP but in future I intend to add a

> standby ASP. Hence I use the trafficmode=override in the messages.
Also

> the desired behavior is that the ASP to laodshare the traffic going to

> the SG among the two SGPs.

> 

> The problem showed up during the following scenario:

> 

> The ASP comes up, establishes associations and sends ASP UP message

> (ASPIdentifier = 10007) to both SGPs for which the SGPs respond with
ASP

> UP ACK.

> 

> The ASP sends ASP ACTIVE (trafficmode=override) with a routing context

> for the AS to the SGP1 and the SGP1 responds with ASP ACTIVE ACK. The

> status on the SG shows that the AS is active on SGP1 and inactive on

> SGP2.

> 

> Later the ASP sends ASP ACTIVE (trafficmode=override) with the same

> routing context to the SGP2 and the SGP2 responds with ASP ACTIVE ACK.

> The status on the SG shows that the AS is active on SGP2 and inactive
on

> SGP1. I was expecting the AS to be active on both SGPs since the ASP
had

> sent ASP ACTIVE to both SGPs.  This was not what I was expecting.

> 

> The explanation given by the Third party SG team is that since they

> treat association from SGP1 to ASP as one ASP (ASP1) and the
association

> from SGP2 to ASP as a separate ASP (ASP2), they are over writing the

> status when the SGP2 received the ASP ACTIVE message from the ASP.
They

> suggest that I put the trafficmode=loadshare and that would solve the

> problem.  So I am really confused.

> 

> Hope this helps.

> 

> Thanks,

> Krishna

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]]

> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 11:15 AM

> To: Munnaluru, Krishna

> Cc: [email protected]

> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP

> 

> Krishna,

> 

> How is the behaviour different?

> 

> --brian

> 

> Munnaluru, Krishna wrote:                       (Thu, 09 Feb 2006

> 10:23:19)

> >

> >    Hi,

> >

> >

> >    I  am implementing ASP and we are trying to interop with a third

> party

> >    SG. The following is the scenario.

> >

> >

> >    We  have  one  ASP  and  one  SG  containing  two  SGPs.  The
ASP

> is

> >    establishing  one  SCTP  association  with  each  SGP  (a total
of

> two

> >    associations).

> >

> >

> >    The problem is that the SG is treating each association as a

> different

> >    ASP.  So it thinks that there are two separate ASPs in the
network.

> Is

> >    this  the  correct  behavior?  My  understanding is that the SG

> should

> >    treat  it  as  "two associations to the same ASP (from each
SGPs)"

> and

> >    NOT "as two separate ASPs".

> >

> >

> >    Could someone please comment on this behavior?

> >

> >

> >    Thanks in advance,

> >

> >    Krishna

> 

> > _______________________________________________

> > Sigtran mailing list

> > [email protected]

> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

> 

> 

> --

> Brian F. G. Bidulock

> [email protected]

> http://www.openss7.org/

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Sigtran mailing list

> [email protected]

> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

> 

 

 

--

Ilie

 

_______________________________________________

Sigtran mailing list

[email protected]

https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran