RE: DRN and TID Label Issues -- Issue #3

Brian,

Personally, I have no problem with pushing LOADSEL as an RFC or addendum
to the SUA RFC.  However, right now, I think since TID routing is an
accepted, useful, and deployed solution, it is what we should resolve.
This does not exclude the presentation of new standards.  I also believe
that ASPCONG should become standard as it is plugging a hole in the
RFCs.

Regards,
Lincoln 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 5:18 PM
To: Haresign Lincoln
Cc: Barry Nagelberg; [email protected]
Subject: Re: DRN and TID Label Issues -- Issue #3

Lincoln,

Haresign Lincoln wrote:
(Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:15:45)
> Brian,
> 
> With the exception of linked dialogs (which I agree is not solved by 
> TID routing alone), nothing we are doing is proprietary with the 
> exception of sending ABORTs or discarding when unable to route.  This 
> obviously only applies to ongoing dialogs and is a temporary situation

> when an ASP dies.

A temporary situation that, when 2 ASP are involved, is termed a "System
Failure", requiring an FCC outage report.  It would be best to use
LOADSEL's ability to pick up for the failed ASP.

--brian

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