RE: M3UA notify message

Brian,

I am not trying to impose some network architecture to people, but just to
show that given protocol mechanisms, using SCTP multihoming + multiple hosts
is the way to achieve carrier grade redundancy.

There could be of course exceptions, e.g. if somebody has a piece of
hardware which fails rare enough to satisfy the requirements, they may not
need host redundancy. Similarly if their network+NIC is very reliable they
may opt not to use multihoming.

   Tolga

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 4:27 PM
> To: Tolga Asveren
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] M3UA notify message
>
>
> Tolga,
>
> The problem with relying on SCTP multihoming for network
> redundancy is that it cuts down the usable bandwidth
> because most SCTP implementations do not do CMT.  Multiple
> single-homed SCTP associations provide redundancy while
> efficiently using the available network bandwidth.  It
> also provides for more controlled and cleaner network
> design and administration for private (or virtual private)
> networks.
>
> Nevertheless, I said it was just an example.
>
> Unlike you, (and your draft) I do not presume to tell others
> how to go about setting up their network.  I belive that the
> last paragraph that I cited was the most important: here it
> is again:
>
>    This model serves as an example.  M3UA imposes no restrictions as to
>    the exact layout of the network elements, the message distribution
>    algorithms and the distribution of the signalling processes.
>    Instead, it provides a framework and a set of messages that allow for
>    a flexible and scalable signalling network architecture, aiming to
>    provide reliability and performance.
>
> It appears that you only want to consider the case where
> there is full-mesh associations.  This is not the only (or
> even a recommended) situtation.  No specific configuration
> is recommended.  The protocol needs handle all situations,
> whether you agree with their practicality or not.
>
> And, I see no need to restrict the view of the protocol to
> supporting only full-mesh at this late date.
>
> --brian
>
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> [email protected]
> http://www.openss7.org/
>