Re: M3UA notify message

Tolga,


Tolga Asveren wrote:                                                 (Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:55:17)
> [TOLGA]Several points:
> a)Internal message routing between SGPs won't buy you lossless failover if
> SCTP association is down (one will loose some of the sent but unacknowledged
> messages)-but yes it is a good thing, when did I say that one shouldn't have
> it?-

Message loss is far better than complete service outage.

> b)A properly designed network core has several mechanisms to deal with
> failovers in a proper way. A few of the mechanisms described in 3.3 in
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-asveren-sigtran-m3uacons-00.txt
> can be used for this purpose, and *are* actually used.

Now you presume to tell others how to "properly" design their networks?

An operator does not necessarily (and does not usually) have design control
over all the networks that they use for transport, particularly in the Big I
to which M3UA is applicable.

> c)If you can't provide a properly engineered IP network, you still can
> deploy M3UA, you just need to keep the expectations about redundancy low,
> and for certain cases that could be totally fine.

With AS/ASP state coordination, an operator does not need to require that all
the networks that it traverses be engineered to your content, and will yet
experience higher redundancy at lower cost than your non-AS/ASP coordination
approach.

--brian

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