Ong, Lyndon | 4 Nov 14:42 2004

RE: M3UA and M2PA issues

Hi Xingyan,
 
Sorry I did not get back to you earlier, the issues with M2PA have mainly to do with
the wording of the security section, and it is complicated because the Security Area
leadership is changing
 
There is basically no functional change in the updated M3UA, mostly corrections and
clarifications as a result of interoperability testing experiences.
 
Cheers,
 
Lyndon
-----Original Message-----
From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:22 PM
To: Ong, Lyndon
Cc: mankin <at> psg.com; jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz; sar <at> epilogue.com; sigtran <at> ietf.org
Subject: Re: M3UA and M2PA issues

Dear chairman and experts
 
Thank you very much for your reply.
can you give me some introduction of  what kind of comments of M2PA? Is that for function or some detail thing?
And for M3UA ,Did the updated version concern about the requirement of usage by STP(Signaling Transport Point),
in another word ,does there exist some mechanism to guarantee the stability and reliability of signaling network?
and do you think the requirements are  reasonable?
 
best regards
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:41 PM
Subject: RE: M3UA and M2PA issues

Xingyan Xia,
 
Regarding the status of M2PA, it is currently resolving comments from the IESG.  Once these
comments have been resolved and it receives approval of the IESG, it will progress to the RFC
Editor's queue for allocation of an RFC number.  There is no definite timetable but I would
expect that it should be in position to receive an RFC number in a matter of a few months,
due to the size of the queue.
 
We have also just approved (at the Working Group level), an updated version of the M3UA,
and this is under review by our Area Director.  The updated version contains some clarifications
resulting from interoperability testing.  The text can be found at
 
Cheers,
 
L. Ong
-----Original Message-----
From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:20 PM
To: Ong, Lyndon
Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
Subject: M3UA and M2PA issues

dear experts
    My question is about SIGTRAN use in WCDMA R4 network.you know if the network is quite large,we need  a signaling network composed by STP(Signaling Transport Point) just like  signaling network in GSM network.when all signaling are transported over IP ,what is the STP'S protocol stack ? M3UA/SCTP/IP or MTP3/M2PA/SCTP/IP? In RFC 3332 about M3UA ,there is no definition of network management such as signaling rerouting、changeover and changeback  and other functions signaling network ,do you have any plan to extend M3UA to use in STP ,not only used in SG? If we use M2PA in STP ,we can reuse the function and mechanism of MTP3,maybe everything is OK ,but why is M2PA only  a draft?when will it become  RFC?  
    I need you help,can you give me some instruction?
 
best regards
 
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
qin.changpeng | 5 Nov 02:41 2004
Picon

绛斿: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


Hi
We just meet the same problem. The network planning using sigtran exclusive
is something new . It's critical whether to use the tranditional framework
or not.
There are two ways: no tranditional framework and tranditional framework.

In a network using M3UA exclusively has no need STP,for STP based on MTP3
has two functions,i.e. converging the signalling links and rerouting at the
fault of links.Ip network has no concept of links, you can understand it a
meshwork,there is no need to converg; and Ip network has an automatic
rerouting machanism.
As for the network management functions of MTP3,they are aimed at
perserving reliability at link failures.In sigtran,reliability if provided
mainly by SCTP,line fault is corrected by IP rerouting mechanism,endpoint
fault is corrected by multihost mechanism.In sigtran network,as the TDM
network,there is no way to keep communication when all endpoints  fail,no
matter which protocol stack used(m3ua or mtp3/m2pa).
The STP based on SCCP can be used in the sameway as tranditional SS7
network.
Constructing net in this will cheaper,even more reliable and efficient for
this is no bottleneck.

And a network using MTP3/M2PA has the same structure as the tranditional
SS7 network,its planing idea and maintainance can be the same as
tranditional net.



                                                                                                                                       
                      "Ong, Lyndon"                                                                                                    
                      <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>        收件人:  "'xingyanxia'" <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>                                          
                      发件人:                 抄送:    sar <at> epilogue.com, sigtran <at> ietf.org, jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz, mankin <at> psg.com  
                      sigtran-bounces <at> i        主题:    [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues                                            
                      etf.org                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       
                      2004-11-04 21:42                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                       




Hi Xingyan,

Sorry I did not get back to you earlier, the issues with M2PA have mainly
to do with
the wording of the security section, and it is complicated because the
Security Area
leadership is changing.

There is basically no functional change in the updated M3UA, mostly
corrections and
clarifications as a result of interoperability testing experiences.

Cheers,

Lyndon
      -----Original Message-----
      From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
      Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:22 PM
      To: Ong, Lyndon
      Cc: mankin <at> psg.com; jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz; sar <at> epilogue.com;
      sigtran <at> ietf.org
      Subject: Re: M3UA and M2PA issues

      Dear chairman and experts

      Thank you very much for your reply.
      can you give me some introduction of  what kind of comments of M2PA?
      Is that for function or some detail thing?
      And for M3UA ,Did the updated version concern about the requirement
      of usage by STP(Signaling Transport Point),
      in another word ,does there exist some mechanism to guarantee the
      stability and reliability of signaling network?
      and do you think the requirements are  reasonable?

      best regards

       ----- Original Message -----
       From: Ong, Lyndon
       To: 'xingyanxia'
       Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
       Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:41 PM
       Subject: RE: M3UA and M2PA issues

       Xingyan Xia,

       Regarding the status of M2PA, it is currently resolving comments
       from the IESG.  Once these
       comments have been resolved and it receives approval of the IESG, it
       will progress to the RFC
       Editor's queue for allocation of an RFC number.  There is no
       definite timetable but I would
       expect that it should be in position to receive an RFC number in a
       matter of a few months,
       due to the size of the queue.

       We have also just approved (at the Working Group level), an updated
       version of the M3UA,
       and this is under review by our Area Director.  The updated version
       contains some clarifications
       resulting from interoperability testing.  The text can be found at
       http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sigtran-rfc3332bis-02.txt


       Cheers,

       L. Ong
             -----Original Message-----
             From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
             Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:20 PM
             To: Ong, Lyndon
             Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
             Subject: M3UA and M2PA issues

             dear experts
                 My question is about SIGTRAN use in WCDMA R4 network.you
             know if the network is quite large,we need  a signaling
             network composed by STP(Signaling Transport Point) just like
             signaling network in GSM network.when all signaling are
             transported over IP ,what is the STP'S protocol stack ?
             M3UA/SCTP/IP or MTP3/M2PA/SCTP/IP? In RFC 3332 about M3UA
             ,there is no definition of network management such as
             signaling rerouting、changeover and changeback  and other
             functions signaling network ,do you have any plan to extend
             M3UA to use in STP ,not only used in SG? If we use M2PA in STP
             ,we can reuse the function and mechanism of MTP3,maybe
             everything is OK ,but why is M2PA only  a draft?when will it
             become  RFC?
                 I need you help,can you give me some instruction?

             best regards
              _______________________________________________
             Sigtran mailing list
             Sigtran <at> ietf.org
             https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran




             ************************************************
             鏈偖浠跺凡缁忚繃鍙嶅瀮鍦鹃偖浠惰繃婊わ紝濡傚彂鐜板瀮鍦?
             閭欢锛岃杞彂鑷筹細helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn銆?
             The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
             system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
             please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
             ************************************************



***********************************************
信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
Information Security  Notice:
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
qin.changpeng | 5 Nov 03:35 2004
Picon

绛斿: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


Can you tell me why there is a precondition of existing of STP? If we are
talking about pure sigtran network,I think it's no use of STP based on
level MTP3; and if we want maintain the tranditional network structure,why
we dont use SS7?
Thanks.



---------------------------------------
Life is like a box of choclate,
You never know what you're going to get
---------------------------------------



                                                                                                                                       
                      "xingyanxia"                                                                                                     
                      <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        收件人:  "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>, <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>                   
                      .cn>                     抄送:    <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, <mankin <at> psg.com>, <sar <at> epilogue.com>,             
                                                <sigtran <at> ietf.org>, <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>                                         
                      2004-11-05 10:15         主题:    Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues                                        
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       




dear experts
I'm very happy to get the mail from ZTE,because we are from the same
country,yes it is CHINA.
I don't agree with you completely .and I think no matter what protocol
stack is used ,M2PA or M3UA ,
the reliability of signaling netwok is needed. and if we used STP ,the SCTP
can only guarantee the reliability of
two STP when use multihoming,it can not guarantee the reliability of two IP
Signaling Point ,so we need the machanism like MTP3 .if we do not use STP
,I think SCTP is enough,but in mobile network it is needed.
 thank you again.


xingyanxia
China Telecom Beijing research institute
Tel:010-58552131
Fax:010-66001396










----- Original Message -----
From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
To: "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>
Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; <mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>;
<sigtran <at> ietf.org>; <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>; "'xingyanxia'"
<xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:41 AM
Subject: 答复: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


>
> Hi
> We just meet the same problem. The network planning using sigtran
exclusive
> is something new . It's critical whether to use the tranditional
framework
> or not.
> There are two ways: no tranditional framework and tranditional framework.
>
> In a network using M3UA exclusively has no need STP,for STP based on MTP3
> has two functions,i.e. converging the signalling links and rerouting at
the
> fault of links.Ip network has no concept of links, you can understand it
a
> meshwork,there is no need to converg; and Ip network has an automatic
> rerouting machanism.
> As for the network management functions of MTP3,they are aimed at
> perserving reliability at link failures.In sigtran,reliability if
provided
> mainly by SCTP,line fault is corrected by IP rerouting mechanism,endpoint
> fault is corrected by multihost mechanism.In sigtran network,as the TDM
> network,there is no way to keep communication when all endpoints  fail,no
> matter which protocol stack used(m3ua or mtp3/m2pa).
> The STP based on SCCP can be used in the sameway as tranditional SS7
> network.
> Constructing net in this will cheaper,even more reliable and efficient
for
> this is no bottleneck.
>
> And a network using MTP3/M2PA has the same structure as the tranditional
> SS7 network,its planing idea and maintainance can be the same as
> tranditional net.
>
>
>
>

>                       "Ong, Lyndon"

>                       <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>        收件人:  "'xingyanxia'"
<xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
>                       发件人:                 抄送:
sar <at> epilogue.com, sigtran <at> ietf.org, jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz,
mankin <at> psg.com
>                       sigtran-bounces <at> i        主题:    [Sigtran] RE:
M3UA and M2PA issues
>                       etf.org

>

>

>                       2004-11-04 21:42

>

>
>
>
>
> Hi Xingyan,
>
> Sorry I did not get back to you earlier, the issues with M2PA have mainly
> to do with
> the wording of the security section, and it is complicated because the
> Security Area
> leadership is changing.
>
> There is basically no functional change in the updated M3UA, mostly
> corrections and
> clarifications as a result of interoperability testing experiences.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lyndon
>       -----Original Message-----
>       From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
>       Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:22 PM
>       To: Ong, Lyndon
>       Cc: mankin <at> psg.com; jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz; sar <at> epilogue.com;
>       sigtran <at> ietf.org
>       Subject: Re: M3UA and M2PA issues
>
>       Dear chairman and experts
>
>       Thank you very much for your reply.
>       can you give me some introduction of  what kind of comments of
M2PA?
>       Is that for function or some detail thing?
>       And for M3UA ,Did the updated version concern about the requirement
>       of usage by STP(Signaling Transport Point),
>       in another word ,does there exist some mechanism to guarantee the
>       stability and reliability of signaling network?
>       and do you think the requirements are  reasonable?
>
>       best regards
>
>        ----- Original Message -----
>        From: Ong, Lyndon
>        To: 'xingyanxia'
>        Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
>        Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:41 PM
>        Subject: RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
>
>        Xingyan Xia,
>
>        Regarding the status of M2PA, it is currently resolving comments
>        from the IESG.  Once these
>        comments have been resolved and it receives approval of the IESG,
it
>        will progress to the RFC
>        Editor's queue for allocation of an RFC number.  There is no
>        definite timetable but I would
>        expect that it should be in position to receive an RFC number in a
>        matter of a few months,
>        due to the size of the queue.
>
>        We have also just approved (at the Working Group level), an
updated
>        version of the M3UA,
>        and this is under review by our Area Director.  The updated
version
>        contains some clarifications
>        resulting from interoperability testing.  The text can be found at
>
http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sigtran-rfc3332bis-02.txt

>
>        Cheers,
>
>        L. Ong
>              -----Original Message-----
>              From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
>              Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:20 PM
>              To: Ong, Lyndon
>              Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
>              Subject: M3UA and M2PA issues
>
>              dear experts
>                  My question is about SIGTRAN use in WCDMA R4 network.you
>              know if the network is quite large,we need  a signaling
>              network composed by STP(Signaling Transport Point) just like
>              signaling network in GSM network.when all signaling are
>              transported over IP ,what is the STP'S protocol stack ?
>              M3UA/SCTP/IP or MTP3/M2PA/SCTP/IP? In RFC 3332 about M3UA
>              ,there is no definition of network management such as
>              signaling rerouting、changeover and changeback  and other
>              functions signaling network ,do you have any plan to extend
>              M3UA to use in STP ,not only used in SG? If we use M2PA in
STP
>              ,we can reuse the function and mechanism of MTP3,maybe
>              everything is OK ,but why is M2PA only  a draft?when will it
>              become  RFC?
>                  I need you help,can you give me some instruction?
>
>              best regards
>               _______________________________________________
>              Sigtran mailing list
>              Sigtran <at> ietf.org
>              https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

>
>
>
>              ************************************************
>              鏈偖浠跺凡缁忚繃鍙嶅瀮鍦鹃偖浠惰繃婊わ紝濡傚彂鐜板瀮鍦?
>              閭欢锛岃杞彂鑷筹細helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn銆?
>              The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
>              system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
>              please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
>              ************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> 信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
> ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
> 保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
> 三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
> 或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
> Information Security  Notice:
> The information contained in this mail is
> solely property of  ZTE Corporation.
> This mail communication is confidential.
> Recipients named above are obligated to
> maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
> disclose the contents of this communication
> to others.
> ***********************************************
>


************************************************
本邮件已经过反垃圾邮件过滤,如发现垃圾
邮件,请转发至:helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn。
The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
************************************************




***********************************************
信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
Information Security  Notice:
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
qin.changpeng | 5 Nov 04:36 2004
Picon

绛斿: Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


Thanks a lot.
As for MAP interfaces,my suggestion is using STP based on SCCP. It's
protocol stack can be SCCP/M3UA,and we can use this type of STP the same
way as in tranditional SS7 net.






                                                                                                                                       
                      "xingyanxia"                                                                                                     
                      <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        收件人:  <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>                                                    
                      .cn>                     抄送:    <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>,                  
                                                <mankin <at> psg.com>, <sar <at> epilogue.com>, <sigtran <at> ietf.org>, <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>   
                      2004-11-05 11:28         主题:    Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues                                    
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       




yes ,all what I talk is about SIGTRAN used in Mobilenetwork,may be that is
WCDMA R4.
you know in mobile network,MAP and CAP is basic,and GT translate is
necessary and the traffic is very heavy.
so  STP is needed.SS7 is also a choice.but you know all IP is trend.

xingyanxia




----- Original Message -----
From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
To: "xingyanxia" <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>;
<mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>; <sigtran <at> ietf.org>;
<sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:35 AM
Subject: 答复: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


>
> Can you tell me why there is a precondition of existing of STP? If we
are
> talking about pure sigtran network,I think it's no use of STP based on
> level MTP3; and if we want maintain the tranditional network
structure,why
> we dont use SS7?
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Life is like a box of choclate,
> You never know what you're going to get
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>

>                       "xingyanxia"

>                       <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        收件人:  "Ong, Lyndon"
<Lyong <at> Ciena.com>, <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
>                       .cn>                     抄送:
<jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, <mankin <at> psg.com>, <sar <at> epilogue.com>,

>                                                 <sigtran <at> ietf.org>,
<sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
>                       2004-11-05 10:15         主题:    Re: [Sigtran]
RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
>

>

>
>
>
>
> dear experts
> I'm very happy to get the mail from ZTE,because we are from the same
> country,yes it is CHINA.
> I don't agree with you completely .and I think no matter what protocol
> stack is used ,M2PA or M3UA ,
> the reliability of signaling netwok is needed. and if we used STP ,the
SCTP
> can only guarantee the reliability of
> two STP when use multihoming,it can not guarantee the reliability of two
IP
> Signaling Point ,so we need the machanism like MTP3 .if we do not use STP
> ,I think SCTP is enough,but in mobile network it is needed.
>  thank you again.
>
>
> xingyanxia
> China Telecom Beijing research institute
> Tel:010-58552131
> Fax:010-66001396
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
> To: "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>
> Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; <mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>;
> <sigtran <at> ietf.org>; <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>; "'xingyanxia'"
> <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:41 AM
> Subject: 答复: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
>
>
> >
> > Hi
> > We just meet the same problem. The network planning using sigtran
> exclusive
> > is something new . It's critical whether to use the tranditional
> framework
> > or not.
> > There are two ways: no tranditional framework and tranditional
framework.
> >
> > In a network using M3UA exclusively has no need STP,for STP based on
MTP3
> > has two functions,i.e. converging the signalling links and rerouting at
> the
> > fault of links.Ip network has no concept of links, you can understand
it
> a
> > meshwork,there is no need to converg; and Ip network has an automatic
> > rerouting machanism.
> > As for the network management functions of MTP3,they are aimed at
> > perserving reliability at link failures.In sigtran,reliability if
> provided
> > mainly by SCTP,line fault is corrected by IP rerouting
mechanism,endpoint
> > fault is corrected by multihost mechanism.In sigtran network,as the TDM
> > network,there is no way to keep communication when all endpoints
fail,no
> > matter which protocol stack used(m3ua or mtp3/m2pa).
> > The STP based on SCCP can be used in the sameway as tranditional SS7
> > network.
> > Constructing net in this will cheaper,even more reliable and efficient
> for
> > this is no bottleneck.
> >
> > And a network using MTP3/M2PA has the same structure as the
tranditional
> > SS7 network,its planing idea and maintainance can be the same as
> > tranditional net.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >                       "Ong, Lyndon"
>
> >                       <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>        收件人:  "'xingyanxia'"
> <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
> >                       发件人:                 抄送:
> sar <at> epilogue.com, sigtran <at> ietf.org, jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz,
> mankin <at> psg.com
> >                       sigtran-bounces <at> i        主题:    [Sigtran] RE:
> M3UA and M2PA issues
> >                       etf.org
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >                       2004-11-04 21:42
>
> >
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Xingyan,
> >
> > Sorry I did not get back to you earlier, the issues with M2PA have
mainly
> > to do with
> > the wording of the security section, and it is complicated because the
> > Security Area
> > leadership is changing.
> >
> > There is basically no functional change in the updated M3UA, mostly
> > corrections and
> > clarifications as a result of interoperability testing experiences.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Lyndon
> >       -----Original Message-----
> >       From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
> >       Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:22 PM
> >       To: Ong, Lyndon
> >       Cc: mankin <at> psg.com; jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz; sar <at> epilogue.com;
> >       sigtran <at> ietf.org
> >       Subject: Re: M3UA and M2PA issues
> >
> >       Dear chairman and experts
> >
> >       Thank you very much for your reply.
> >       can you give me some introduction of  what kind of comments of
> M2PA?
> >       Is that for function or some detail thing?
> >       And for M3UA ,Did the updated version concern about the
requirement
> >       of usage by STP(Signaling Transport Point),
> >       in another word ,does there exist some mechanism to guarantee the
> >       stability and reliability of signaling network?
> >       and do you think the requirements are  reasonable?
> >
> >       best regards
> >
> >        ----- Original Message -----
> >        From: Ong, Lyndon
> >        To: 'xingyanxia'
> >        Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
> >        Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:41 PM
> >        Subject: RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
> >
> >        Xingyan Xia,
> >
> >        Regarding the status of M2PA, it is currently resolving comments
> >        from the IESG.  Once these
> >        comments have been resolved and it receives approval of the
IESG,
> it
> >        will progress to the RFC
> >        Editor's queue for allocation of an RFC number.  There is no
> >        definite timetable but I would
> >        expect that it should be in position to receive an RFC number in
a
> >        matter of a few months,
> >        due to the size of the queue.
> >
> >        We have also just approved (at the Working Group level), an
> updated
> >        version of the M3UA,
> >        and this is under review by our Area Director.  The updated
> version
> >        contains some clarifications
> >        resulting from interoperability testing.  The text can be found
at
> >
> http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sigtran-rfc3332bis-02.txt

> >
> >        Cheers,
> >
> >        L. Ong
> >              -----Original Message-----
> >              From: xingyanxia [mailto:xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn]
> >              Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:20 PM
> >              To: Ong, Lyndon
> >              Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
> >              Subject: M3UA and M2PA issues
> >
> >              dear experts
> >                  My question is about SIGTRAN use in WCDMA R4
network.you
> >              know if the network is quite large,we need  a signaling
> >              network composed by STP(Signaling Transport Point) just
like
> >              signaling network in GSM network.when all signaling are
> >              transported over IP ,what is the STP'S protocol stack ?
> >              M3UA/SCTP/IP or MTP3/M2PA/SCTP/IP? In RFC 3332 about M3UA
> >              ,there is no definition of network management such as
> >              signaling rerouting、changeover and changeback  and other
> >              functions signaling network ,do you have any plan to
extend
> >              M3UA to use in STP ,not only used in SG? If we use M2PA in
> STP
> >              ,we can reuse the function and mechanism of MTP3,maybe
> >              everything is OK ,but why is M2PA only  a draft?when will
it
> >              become  RFC?
> >                  I need you help,can you give me some instruction?
> >
> >              best regards
> >               _______________________________________________
> >              Sigtran mailing list
> >              Sigtran <at> ietf.org
> >              https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

> >
> >
> >
> >              ************************************************
> >              鏈偖浠跺凡缁忚繃鍙嶅瀮鍦鹃偖浠惰繃婊わ紝濡傚彂鐜板瀮鍦?
> >              閭欢锛岃杞彂鑷筹細helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn銆?
> >              The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
> >              system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
> >              please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
> >              ************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ***********************************************
> > 信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
> > ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
> > 保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
> > 三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
> > 或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
> > Information Security  Notice:
> > The information contained in this mail is
> > solely property of  ZTE Corporation.
> > This mail communication is confidential.
> > Recipients named above are obligated to
> > maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
> > disclose the contents of this communication
> > to others.
> > ***********************************************
> >
>
>
> ************************************************
> 本邮件已经过反垃圾邮件过滤,如发现垃圾
> 邮件,请转发至:helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn。
> The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
> system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
> please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
> ************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> 信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
> ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
> 保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
> 三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
> 或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
> Information Security  Notice:
> The information contained in this mail is
> solely property of  ZTE Corporation.
> This mail communication is confidential.
> Recipients named above are obligated to
> maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
> disclose the contents of this communication
> to others.
> ***********************************************
>


************************************************
本邮件已经过反垃圾邮件过滤,如发现垃圾
邮件,请转发至:helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn。
The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
************************************************




***********************************************
信息安全声明:本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有,
ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
保密,未经发件人书面许可,不得向任何第
三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
Information Security  Notice:
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
qin.changpeng | 5 Nov 04:46 2004
Picon

绛斿: Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


Thanks a lot.
As for MAP interfaces,my suggestion is using STP based on SCCP. It's
protocol stack can be SCCP/M3UA锛宎nd we can use this type of STP the same
way as in tranditional SS7 net.






                                                                                                                                       
                      "xingyanxia"                                                                                                     
                      <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        鏀朵欢浜猴細  <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>                                                    
                      .cn>                     鎶勯侊細    <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>,                  
                                                <mankin <at> psg.com>, <sar <at> epilogue.com>, <sigtran <at> ietf.org>, <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>   
                      2004-11-05 11:28         涓婚锛    Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues                                    
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       




yes ,all what I talk is about SIGTRAN used in Mobilenetwork,may be that is
WCDMA R4.
you know in mobile network,MAP and CAP is basic,and GT translate is
necessary and the traffic is very heavy.
so  STP is needed.SS7 is also a choice.but you know all IP is trend.

xingyanxia




----- Original Message -----
From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
To: "xingyanxia" <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>;
<mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>; <sigtran <at> ietf.org>;
<sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:35 AM
Subject: 绛斿: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


>
> Can you tell me why there is a precondition of existing of STP锛 If we
are
> talking about pure sigtran network,I think it's no use of STP based on
> level MTP3; and if we want maintain the tranditional network
structure,why
> we dont use SS7?
> Thanks.
>
>
>









***********************************************
淇℃伅瀹夊叏澹版槑锛氭湰閭欢鍖呭惈淇℃伅褰抁TE鎵鏈夛紝
ZTE瀵硅閭欢鎷ユ湁鎵鏈夋潈鍒┿傝鎺ユ敹鑰呮敞鎰
淇濆瘑锛屾湭缁忓彂浠朵汉涔﹂潰璁稿彲锛屼笉寰楀悜浠讳綍绗
涓夋柟缁勭粐鍜屼釜浜洪忛湶鏈偖浠舵墍鍚俊鎭殑鍏ㄩ儴
鎴栭儴鍒嗐備互涓婂0鏄庝粎閫傜敤浜庡伐浣滈偖浠躲
Information Security  Notice锛
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
qin.changpeng | 5 Nov 06:39 2004
Picon

绛斿: Re: Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


We can think of such net as two levels: SCCP routing by GT as higher level,
Mtp3/M3ua routing by point code as lower level.When we talk about the
network of the lower level,there is no need to use a STP as in SS7 net;when
we talk about the interconnection of higher level,en,why we can't use M3UA?




                                                                                                                                       
                      "xingyanxia"                                                                                                     
                      <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        鏀朵欢浜猴細  <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>                                                    
                      .cn>                     鎶勯侊細    <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>,                  
                                                <mankin <at> psg.com>, <sar <at> epilogue.com>, <sigtran <at> ietf.org>, <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>   
                      2004-11-05 13:28         涓婚锛    Re: Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues                                
                                                                                                                                       




That is the question I ask at the beginning.I think if we use
SCCP/M3UA/SCTP/IP in STP and in the MAP interface,
there are problems,because there is no signaling management function and
oter machanism  to guarantee the reliability
of signaling network.so from this point of view ,M2PA used in STP is more
suitable,but M2PA is just a drft. do you think so?


xingyanxia
----- Original Message -----
From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
To: "xingyanxia" <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>;
<mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>; <sigtran <at> ietf.org>;
<sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 11:46 AM
Subject: 绛斿: Re: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues


>
> Thanks a lot.
> As for MAP interfaces,my suggestion is using STP based on SCCP. It's
> protocol stack can be SCCP/M3UA锛宎nd we can use this type of STP the same
> way as in tranditional SS7 net.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>                       "xingyanxia"

>                       <xingyx <at> ctbri.com        鏀朵欢浜猴細
<qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>

>                       .cn>                     鎶勯侊細
<jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>, "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>,

>                                                 <mankin <at> psg.com>,
<sar <at> epilogue.com>, <sigtran <at> ietf.org>, <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
>                       2004-11-05 11:28         涓婚锛    Re: Re:
[Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
>

>

>
>
>
>
> yes ,all what I talk is about SIGTRAN used in Mobilenetwork,may be that
is
> WCDMA R4.
> you know in mobile network,MAP and CAP is basic,and GT translate is
> necessary and the traffic is very heavy.
> so  STP is needed.SS7 is also a choice.but you know all IP is trend.
>
> xingyanxia
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <qin.changpeng <at> zte.com.cn>
> To: "xingyanxia" <xingyx <at> ctbri.com.cn>
> Cc: <jon.peterson <at> neustar.biz>; "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong <at> Ciena.com>;
> <mankin <at> psg.com>; <sar <at> epilogue.com>; <sigtran <at> ietf.org>;
> <sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:35 AM
> Subject: 绛斿: Re: [Sigtran] RE: M3UA and M2PA issues
>
>
> >
> > Can you tell me why there is a precondition of existing of STP锛 If we
> are
> > talking about pure sigtran network,I think it's no use of STP based on
> > level MTP3; and if we want maintain the tranditional network
> structure,why
> > we dont use SS7?
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> 淇℃伅瀹夊叏澹版槑锛氭湰閭欢鍖呭惈淇℃伅褰抁TE鎵鏈夛紝
> ZTE瀵硅閭欢鎷ユ湁鎵鏈夋潈鍒┿傝鎺ユ敹鑰呮敞鎰
> 淇濆瘑锛屾湭缁忓彂浠朵汉涔﹂潰璁稿彲锛屼笉寰楀悜浠讳綍绗
> 涓夋柟缁勭粐鍜屼釜浜洪忛湶鏈偖浠舵墍鍚俊鎭殑鍏ㄩ儴
> 鎴栭儴鍒嗐備互涓婂0鏄庝粎閫傜敤浜庡伐浣滈偖浠躲
> Information Security  Notice锛
> The information contained in this mail is
> solely property of  ZTE Corporation.
> This mail communication is confidential.
> Recipients named above are obligated to
> maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
> disclose the contents of this communication
> to others.
> ***********************************************
>


************************************************
鏈偖浠跺凡缁忚繃鍙嶅瀮鍦鹃偖浠惰繃婊わ紝濡傚彂鐜板瀮鍦
閭欢锛岃杞彂鑷筹細helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn銆
The email has  been scanned by Anti-Spam
system,  if you find Spam or Virus in this mail,
please forward it to: helpdesk <at> zte.com.cn
************************************************



***********************************************
淇℃伅瀹夊叏澹版槑锛氭湰閭欢鍖呭惈淇℃伅褰抁TE鎵鏈夛紝
ZTE瀵硅閭欢鎷ユ湁鎵鏈夋潈鍒┿傝鎺ユ敹鑰呮敞鎰
淇濆瘑锛屾湭缁忓彂浠朵汉涔﹂潰璁稿彲锛屼笉寰楀悜浠讳綍绗
涓夋柟缁勭粐鍜屼釜浜洪忛湶鏈偖浠舵墍鍚俊鎭殑鍏ㄩ儴
鎴栭儴鍒嗐備互涓婂0鏄庝粎閫傜敤浜庡伐浣滈偖浠躲
Information Security  Notice锛
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Gunther Palmer | 5 Nov 10:31 2004

WiMAX Summit: Call for proposals

What is the business model for WiMAX?
What do we learn from earlier deployments?
What about the future extensions of the standard?
How is addressed the interoperability challenge?

These questions, among others, will be addressed during the second edition of the WiMAX Summit, next April 5-8 2005, by distinguished experts and key players in the field.

 

The call for proposal dead line has been extended to November 30.

 

Details at:

http://www.upperside.fr/wimax05/wimax2005intro.htm

 

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
mwallis | 8 Nov 23:33 2004

Clarification Requested on SUA RFC 3868 Address Mapping at the ASP Sect 1.5.2

Dear Sigtran,

I would like some clarification on section 1.5.2 Address Mapping at the ASP.

If an ASP is connected to multiple SGs each consisting of two SGPs and the
SGs need to support SCCP Class 1 to and from an SS7 network. The ASP has a basic
address mapping funcion based on the CdPA. The ASP performs a GTT type lookup
and correctly determines an SG for a TC-Invoke to a SEP and loadshares across
the two SGPs in that SG.

Question - When the ASP sends a TC-Return_Result_Last or TC_Continue back to 
the SS7 network should it use its address mapping function? Section 1.5.2 last 
paragraph reads as if the Address Mapping Function should not be used - "An ASP 
routes responses to the SGP that it received messages from....". 

Thanks

Mark Wallis.
mwallis <at> wirelesslab.com
FCG Jiang Hui | 9 Nov 07:58 2004
Picon

Is it feasible to support transparent ISUP message between two M2UA gateway?

1. Is it feasible to support transparent ISUP message between two M2UA gateway?
If it is true, IMO, for gateway, it should support SGP/ASP function both. Is it correct?
The precondition is that we use M2UA tuneling mode instead of SCTP to transparent
ISUP message.

this is only some background info. Crosschecked again RFC 2719: basic
SIGTRAN architecture is already considering the SG-to-SG mode.

   The following figure describes a more generic use of SS7-IP
   interworking for transport of SS7 upper layer signaling across an IP
   network, where the endpoints are both SS7 SEPs.

RFC 2719     Framework Architecture for Signaling Transport October 1999


            ******   SS7  ******    IP       ******  SS7   ******
            *SEP *--------* SG *-----------* SG *--------*SEP *
            ******          ******             ******           ******

            +----+                                              +-----+
            |S7UP|                                              | S7UP|
            +----+                                              +-----+
            |MTP3|                                               | MTP3|
            +----+        +---------+      +---------+      +-----+
            |MTP2|      |MTP2| SIG|     |SIG |MTP2|    | MTP2|
            +    +        +    +----+      +----+    +       +     +
            |      |        |     | IP |       | IP  |    |        |     |
            +----+       +----+----+     +----+----+      +-----+

                      Figure 11: SG to SG Case 2

Note:
   Signaling End Point (SEP):

   This is a node in an SS7 network that originates or terminates
   signaling messages.  One example is a central office switch.



Best regards.

Jiang Hui
Tel: +8621-58541240-9542
MAILTO: Hui.Jiang <at> alcatel-sbell.com.cn



_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
FCG Jiang Hui | 9 Nov 08:15 2004
Picon

about port number 0


IMO, M2UA SG should support to use two schemes to distinguish different ASP:
1. ip address only
2. ip addr + port number

Now we want to support switchover of these two schemes , so we prepare  to use port number
0 for scheme 1. All other configuration about port number will use scheme 2.  In other words,
if port number is configured as 0, it will use ip addr only to distinguish ASP.
My question is:
1. Is it feasible and resonable? any other ideas availeable?
2. Does port 0 reserve for other feature using?


Best regards.

Jiang Hui
Tel: +8621-58541240-9542
MAILTO: Hui.Jiang <at> alcatel-sbell.com.cn



_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran

Gmane