Re: SUA Address Indicator
Warren Anthony Briggs <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Brian, no I do not know of any current applications using bit 8. But I think its quite possible that it is in use somewhere. I am really attempting to get some consensus on how it should be interpreted. I think it makes to follow the SCCP specs as bit 8 of the Address Indicator is spare in SUA but I could not see this stated explicitly in RFC 3868. regards, warren Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: >Warren, > >Do you know of a case where bit 8 has a national assignment that is >actually in use? > >--brian > >On Wed, 17 May 2006, Warren Anthony Briggs wrote: > > > >>Hi All, >> >>Could you please clarify the following: >> >>Q.713. section 3.4.1 states that bit 8 of the SCCP Address Indicator >>parameter is reserved for national use. RFC 3868 appears to indicate >>that this bit is spare and always 0. Am I interpreting this correctly >>or should this bit have a 1 to 1 mapping when encoding from SUA to SCCP >>and vice versa? >> >>thank you, >>warren briggs. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Sigtran mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> >> > > >