RE: RFC 4666 M3UA - Reg Request Message

"Haresign Lincoln" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sigtran
Message-ID <849535E338E99741B7F7413F73253EDB051C01BA@us-nj-mail1.comverse.com>
Brian,

"did you look at the spec" 

Yes.

You say AS is on the basis of PC.  Do you mean OPC?  Or DPC?  

Again, the way I understand this is that each AS must have a routing
criteria based upon either OPC or DPC and then you can use LOADSEL for
loadsharing the CIC ranges within the AS.  Is that correct, or have I
misunderstood?

Regards,
Lincoln 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 4:18 PM
To: Haresign Lincoln
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] RFC 4666 M3UA - Reg Request Message

Haresign,

Yes, that is how it works.  Load selections are defined within an AS.
Therefore, the AS is on the basis of Point Code (and possibly SI=5).
CIC ranges are defined as load selectors and load selections are
assigned to ASPs serving the loadshare AS.  So, all ASPs in this example
AS would serve the same Point Code, but would be given traffic for
different CIC ranges.  Did you look at the draft?

--brian

Haresign Lincoln wrote:                      (Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:10:12)
> Brian,
> 
> Is it possible using LOADSEL (or LOADGRP) to have two different 
> Application Servers (not ASPs) handling different CIC ranges?  Both AS

> would share the same PC as the SG.
> 
> Regards,
> Lincoln
> 

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.