headers
Sheshendra Rathi | 5 Dec 2007 11:01
Picon

M2PA Processor Outage state ?


Hi

When an  M2PA is in Processor Outage state and 
The SCPT ABORT or Shut Down is received 
is it right to Send an XCOO on the other link.

i.e. in a Processot outage state can we do an Change over if the SCTP abort
or shutdown is received.

Thanks,
Sheshendra Rathi
--

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/M2PA-Processor-Outage-state---tf4948563.html#a14168478
Sent from the IETF - Sigtran mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 5 Dec 2007 16:14
Favicon

Re: M2PA Processor Outage state ?

Sheshendra,

Yes.  Abort is certainly link failure at Level 3.

--brian

Sheshendra Rathi wrote:                                (Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:01:46)
> 
> Hi
> 
> When an  M2PA is in Processor Outage state and 
> The SCPT ABORT or Shut Down is received 
> is it right to Send an XCOO on the other link.
> 
> i.e. in a Processot outage state can we do an Change over if the SCTP abort
> or shutdown is received.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Sheshendra Rathi
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/M2PA-Processor-Outage-state---tf4948563.html#a14168478
> Sent from the IETF - Sigtran mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Sheshendra Rathi | 6 Dec 2007 08:32
Picon

Re: M2PA Processor Outage state ?


Dose it mean that I should be handling the link failures during Processor
Outage,
As RFC does not say any thing on link failures during Processor outage.

--Rathi

Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> 
> Sheshendra,
> 
> Yes.  Abort is certainly link failure at Level 3.
> 
> --brian
> 
> Sheshendra Rathi wrote:                                (Wed, 05 Dec 2007
> 02:01:46)
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> When an  M2PA is in Processor Outage state and 
>> The SCPT ABORT or Shut Down is received 
>> is it right to Send an XCOO on the other link.
>> 
>> i.e. in a Processot outage state can we do an Change over if the SCTP
>> abort
>> or shutdown is received.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Veena S | 6 Dec 2007 08:39
Picon

M3UA, Configuration of the remote PS

hi,
 
Is it possible to configure new remote PS without the local PS??
I think we can configure the remote PS only if corresponding local PS are present.
I mean to say that if in ASP side if we configure two AS then we can only configure the two remote PS with the same routing key that the local PS is configured.
if i understood wrong please clarify me
 
Thanks,
veena 
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 6 Dec 2007 10:29
Favicon

Re: M2PA Processor Outage state ?

Sheshendra,

Q.703 permits link failure during remote processor outage.
Q.703 does not permite link failure during local processor
outage (because if L2 can deliver link failure to L3 there is no
local processor outage at L2).

Also:

|4.  Procedures
|
|   Because M2PA provides MTP3 with an interface and functionality like
|   MTP2, its internal functioning is similar to that of MTP2.
|
|   Except as modified in this document, M2PA SHOULD follow the
|   requirements of the applicable MTP2 specification.  These may include
|   [Q.703] or [T1.111].  The same standard MUST be followed on both ends
|   of the M2PA link.
|
|   In particular, the corresponding applicable timer value defaults and
|   ranges specified for the applicable MTP2 standard should be used for
|   the M2PA timers.
|
|   When referring to MTP2 terminology in this document, the terminology
|   of [Q.703] is used.  This does not imply that the requirements of
|   [Q.703] are to be followed.

--brian

Sheshendra Rathi wrote:                          (Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:32:55)
> 
> 
> Dose it mean that I should be handling the link failures during Processor
> Outage,
> As RFC does not say any thing on link failures during Processor outage.
> 
> --Rathi

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 6 Dec 2007 10:30
Favicon

Re: M3UA, Configuration of the remote PS

Veena,

What is a 'PS'?

--brian

Veena S wrote:                                 (Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:09:58)
> 
>    hi,
> 
> 
> 
>    Is it possible to configure new remote PS without the local PS??
> 
>    I think  we can configure the remote PS only if corresponding local PS
>    are present.
> 
>    I  mean  to say that if in ASP side if we configure two AS then we can
>    only  configure  the  two remote PS with the same routing key that the
>    local PS is configured.
> 
>    if i understood wrong please clarify me
> 
> 
> 
>    Thanks,
> 
>    veena

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

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Christopher Benson | 6 Dec 2007 19:34

Re: M3UA, Configuration of the remote PS

Veena,

You wrote:
>>  I mean to say that if in ASP side if we configure two
>>  AS then we can only configure the two remote PS with
>>  the same routing key that the local PS is configured.

I will assume that by local PS in your example, you refer
to an AS, the thing that has (is defined by) one Routing 
Key, and by remote PS, you may refer to an SG or SGP.

The mechanism and order of operations for local 
configuration (provisioning) of remote information
in the described scenario is not a matter for the 
protocol specification. It is thus implementation
dependent.

However, knowledge of remote SG/SGP handling for a
specific Routing Key, serves no local purpose until
that Routing Key is also provisioned as a local AS.
So provision both ends in whatever order your
implementation requires.

I apologise in advance if that wasn't actually
your question, or meaning of PS.

Chris Benson.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Veena S wrote:

>>  Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:09:58 +0530
>>  From: Veena S <veena.sig <at> gmail.com>
>>  To: sigtran <at> ietf.org
>>  Subject: [Sigtran] M3UA, Configuration of the remote PS
>>  
>>  hi,
>>  
>>  Is it possible to configure new remote PS without the local PS??
>>  I think we can configure the remote PS only if corresponding local PS are
>>  present.
>>  I mean to say that if in ASP side if we configure two AS then we can only
>>  configure the two remote PS with the same routing key that the local PS is
>>  configured.
>>  if i understood wrong please clarify me
>>  
>>  Thanks,
>>  veena
>>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 10 Dec 2007 09:14
Favicon

Re: M3UA, network apperance value

Veena,

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Veena S wrote:
> 
>    I  like  to know can we set the network appearance value to zero.

Yes.  Zero is valid value.

>
>    What is significance of this?

No more than the other end makes of it.

--brian

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock    ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
bidulock <at> openss7.org    ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
                        ¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
                        ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jason Parker | 10 Dec 2007 15:45
Favicon

SUA, IPSP SE mode and ASP Active Ack Traffic mode param

Hello,

My question relates to the Single Exchange mode of operation in an IPSP situation for the SUA. 

For the Traffic mode param in the ASP Active Ack message RFC3868 states:  "..reflecting any Traffic Mode Type value present in the related ASP Active message."

This implies it should be the same (possibly validated ?) Traffic Mode sent in the ASP Active Ack message as was received in the ASP Active message.

RFC3868 also says about IPSP considerations: "...An ASP receiving an ASP Active Ack message may mark the peer as ASP-Active, if it is not already in the ASP-ACTIVE state."  

i.e. we receive an Ack to the message sent from this end, containing our own Traffic mode and not that from the remote end.  So my question is how do we obtain the traffic mode from the remote end ?

Thanks in advance,

Jason

 

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
David Laight | 10 Dec 2007 17:09

SCTP heartbeat timeout

SCTP uses a heartbeat message to detect failure of the peer system.

When we test this with the SCTP code in linux 2.6 it takes 15-16
minutes to report a failure on an idle connection.

Is this the expected timeout, it seems a little long!

I would have expected the code to try more aggressively to get
a response once the original 30 second timer expires.

	David

Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)  
P Please consider the environment and don't print this e-mail unless you really need to
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane