DRST message handling
"Shmelev, Kirill" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sigtran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, I have doubts about the DRST message. Judging from RFC4666, one can say, that DRST is somewhat similar to the TFR message. The extract from Q.704 (ch. 13.4.3) says: "When a signalling point receives a transfer-restricted message from signalling transfer point Y and has an alternative equal priority link set available and not restricted to destination X, it performs the actions in 8.2." While RFC4666 (ch. 3.4.6) believes: "The M3UA layer at the ASP is expected to send traffic to the affected destination via an alternate SG with a route of equal priority, but only if such an alternate route exists and is available" The difference is in the state of an alternative route, Q.704 proposes to take into account restricted routes in addition to available ones, while RFC4666 denies usage of restricted routes. Am I right? If yes, then, why the restricted routes are removed? It is quite important for us, in spite of the seeming insignificance of the matter. Looking forward to see an answer Thank in advance, Shmelev Kirill, _______________________________________________ Sigtran mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran