Re: RC & NA doubt

Brian,
I am not sure I follow. Can you explain this in a better way?

Thanks for you time

Aditya Sehgal

On Nov 16, 2007 4:26 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <[email protected]> wrote:
> Aditya,
>
> Aditya Sehgal wrote:                                                (Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:34:15)
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Section 3.6.1 of RFC M3UA 4666 states
> >
> > " If the Network Appearance is not specified and the Routing Key
> > applies to all Network Appearances, then this Routing Key MUST be the
> > only
> >   one registered for the association; that is, Routing Context is
> > implied, and DATA and SSNM messages are discriminated on Network
> >   Appearance rather than on Routing Context.  Where Network Appearance
> > is not specified and there is only one Network
> >   Appearance, then Network Appearance is implied"
> >
> > It says Routing Key can apply to al Network Apperances. [An example
> > scenario anyone??]
> >
> > However, further down in Section 3.7.1 while explaining ASP ACTIVE
> > message, in Routing Context RFC states
> > "Because an AS can only appear in one Network Appearance, the Network
> > Appearance parameter is not  required in the ASP Active message."
> >
> > and the AS is suppose to service a Routing Key.
> >
> > Isnt the RFC implying that a Routing Key can span multiple Network
> > Apperances and later on implying the opposite. Please correct if there
> > is a gap in my understanding?
>
> Because Network Appearance is an abstract concept, there need be no
> difference between "one" an "all".  (Said another way: there are no
> rules or constraints on the cardinality of network appearances.)
>
> But I agree the text is confusing.  It is ironic that it was added
> to the RFC to "clarify" the situation.
>
> --brian
>
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> [email protected]
> http://www.openss7.org/
>



-- 
Don't take life too seriously....Nobody comes out alive anyway