Re: ????: Re: FW: LS on Clarification of M3UA usage in3GPP networks

Asveren,,

Asveren, Tolga wrote:                 (Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:48:52)
> Could the reason be that some people want to replace traditional STPs with
> their SIGTRAN equivalents?

The SIGTRAN equivalent of an STP is an STP.

The IP equivalent of an STP at MTP is a router, and at SCCP is a
router and a directory.

> And they don't want to use M2PA because they think it is
> heavyweight for their purposes? (Some people do have faith in
> SCTP ;-) )

Let me see, you mean that M2PA is to heavyweight but an STP nodal
function is not?  Strange, it is M2PA that keeps one from having to
change to much in the STP.  If you don't already have an STP, you
don't need one (just a router and a directory server).

> 
> So, I guess, there is the practical, operational side of the coin
> as well as the purely theoretical/technical one.

If by practical, you mean legacy, then minimal changes to STP nodal
functions is paramount: that is best accomplished with existing
C-links (not even M2PA) and M3UA in pure backhaul model (can be run
outside the SS7 stack at the STP).

> 
> I am also aware of cases, where people needed to build IPSPs
> proxying remote PCs to overcome this problem.

Why would one ever need to do that?  The only reason for that that
I can think of is VASP or CAT mediation and that is a whole
different ball of wax: it is near impossible to apply to the SS7
network far less one intended to work seamlessly with one.

--brian

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