RE: SG view of the ASP
"Tolga Asveren" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ooppppss a typo... ASP2 should read SGP2. tolga > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On > Behalf Of Tolga Asveren > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 2:08 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP > > > Bary, > > I was maybe not clear from english language point of view. > > What I tried to say is: > > There is SGP1 and SGP2 and ASP1. SGP1 and SGP2 are part of SG1. SGP1 > interacts only with a single ASP, i.e. ASP1. ASP2 interacts only with a > single ASP, i.e. ASP1. Each SGP keeps their own state machine tables for > ASPs. Because each of them has only a single ASP in their lists, that ASP > will be the only ACTIVE ASP from both SGP point of view. > > Tolga > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On > > Behalf Of Barry Nagelberg > > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 2:17 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP > > > > > > Tolga, > > > > You are contradicting yourself. If "ASP/SGP relationship/state > > machines are kep on each SGP separetly", then how can > > these two separate SGPs know that they are interacting with a > single ASP? > > > > Barry Nagelberg > > Adax, Inc. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On > > Behalf Of Tolga Asveren > > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 12:55 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP > > > > > > Krishna, > > > > Your expectation is how it is supposed to work. ASP/SGP > relationship/state > > machines are kep on each SGP separetly. In your example, both SGPs are > > interacting with a single ASP, and from their point of view, it > > is the only > > ACTIVE ASP. > > > > tolga > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On > > > Behalf Of Munnaluru, Krishna > > > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 12:35 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Subject: RE: [Sigtran] SG view of the ASP > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >