Re: ASPSM and ASPTM example for SG having multiple SGPs
"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Organization | http://www.openss7.org/ |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Tolga,
ASPs can always rely on NTFY messages of AS state change: the SGP is
required to send them. OTOH, the ASP is not required to rely upon them,
but it surely can.
--brian
Tolga Asveren wrote: (Wed, 01 Mar 2006 08:18:57)
> Sandeep,
>
> I completely agree that examples are necessary. OTOH, I think first we need
> to decide what is the "best" semantics.
>
> I really think we should discuss with an open-mind what the NTFY/traffic
> distribution semantics should be for multiple SGP cases. I am in favor of
> having all ASPSM/ASPTM per SGP. For NTFY, I think we may have a bit more
> flexibility, considering its advisory nature. BTW, are ASPs relying on
> NTFY("AS State Change") notifications for any decision, it seems to me they
> shouldn't but there may be some which do in practice. It could be also good
> to get some feedback from more people about that.
>
> Thanks,
> Tolga
>
--
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/