RE: M3UA notify message

Ooopppsss typo:

[TOLGA]I don't think people will deploy SIGTRAN in big-I Internet. That
people are not in control of the core network does not mean that they can
buy the QoS/VPN between two points they want.                         ^^^^^
                                                                      can't

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tolga Asveren [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 5:40 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Sigtran] M3UA notify message
>
>
> Brian,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 5:52 PM
> > To: Tolga Asveren
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Sigtran] 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.
> [TOLGA]Did I say otherwise? I don't understand how you started to speak
> about this internal routing issue at all. We are discussing the
> benefits of
> SCTP multihoming. Using SCTP multihoming does not mean that one shouldn't
> have internal message routing, they are not mutually exclusive I
> repeat what
> I said, internal routing is a nice thing to have.
> >
> > > 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.
[TOLGA]I don't think people will deploy SIGTRAN in big-I Internet. That
people are not in control of the core network does not mean that they can
buy the QoS/VPN between two points they want.
>
> > 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.
[TOLGA]I repeat again, internal routing is important but not enough for real
carrier grade deployment, but of course people are free to use the toplogy
they want.
>
> --brian
>
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> [email protected]
> http://www.openss7.org/
>



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