headers
Santhana | 5 Apr 2011 08:26
Favicon

[MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links

Hi

      I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query clarified.

 

My Query:

      Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ?

 

      In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in this case.

      In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification.

     

      Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged?

 

      But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ?

 

      Pls help me understand this point.

 

Thanks & Regards

Santhanakrishnan

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
arif khan | 5 Apr 2011 16:27
Picon

Re: [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links

Yes ....It is possible with broadband support at the SCCP and MTP3 Level for HSL

Regards
-arif

On 4/5/11, Santhana <santhana <at> huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
>       I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If
> I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query
> clarified.
>
>
>
> My Query:
>
>       Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ?
>
>
>
>       In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M
> links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is
> also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in
> this case.
>
>       In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification.
>
>
>
>       Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged?
>
>
>
>       But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But
> above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this
> XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN
> parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ?
>
>
>
>       Pls help me understand this point.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Santhanakrishnan
>
>
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Santhana | 6 Apr 2011 07:36
Favicon

Re: [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links


Hi
	I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I
wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which message COO/XCO
should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits....

Regards
Santhanakrishnan

-----Original Message-----
From: arif khan [mailto:arif15jan <at> gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 7:58 PM
To: santhana <at> huawei.com
Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links

Yes ....It is possible with broadband support at the SCCP and MTP3 Level for
HSL

Regards
-arif

On 4/5/11, Santhana <santhana <at> huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
>       I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG.
If
> I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query
> clarified.
>
>
>
> My Query:
>
>       Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ?
>
>
>
>       In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M
> links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is
> also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in
> this case.
>
>       In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification.
>
>
>
>       Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged?
>
>
>
>       But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But
> above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this
> XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN
> parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ?
>
>
>
>       Pls help me understand this point.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Santhanakrishnan
>
>
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
David Laight | 6 Apr 2011 10:03

Re: [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links


> Hi
> 	I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I
> wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which 
> message COO/XCO
> should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits....

I don't see a problem with putting a 12bit sequence number into
a 24bit field (much harder the other way around!).

The 2M/1.5M links from Q.703 Annex A certainly are used (or have
been used!). We've been asked whether we support them, but only
for 'tick box' filling, none of our customers has actually asked
us to support them (the difficulty is getting the timeslot data
through the tdm cross bar switch and the falcs without
generating a 'shear' midway through the tdm frame.

My suspicions are the the SIGTRAN protocols are being used
for any links that need to carry large traffic loads.

	David
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Santhana | 6 Apr 2011 10:41
Favicon

Re: [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links

Hi David
	Thanks for your opinion. Pls check inline.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Laight [mailto:David.Laight <at> ACULAB.COM] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 1:34 PM
To: santhana <at> huawei.com; arif khan
Cc: sigtran <at> ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links

 
> Hi
> 	I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I
> wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which 
> message COO/XCO
> should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits....

I don't see a problem with putting a 12bit sequence number into
a 24bit field (much harder the other way around!).
--> I also think this way. But there is no explicit note about this in the
Spec, both in Q.703 or Q.2210.

The 2M/1.5M links from Q.703 Annex A certainly are used (or have
been used!). We've been asked whether we support them, but only
for 'tick box' filling, none of our customers has actually asked
us to support them (the difficulty is getting the timeslot data
through the tdm cross bar switch and the falcs without
generating a 'shear' midway through the tdm frame.

My suspicions are the the SIGTRAN protocols are being used
for any links that need to carry large traffic loads.
--> What u mean here? SIGTRAN protocols like M3UA, SUA have no restriction
on the DATA size/length by the very Standard, as they run over IP. Even
there can be(there is) a SG of M3UA-MTP3B(SAAL links) also.

	David

+ Santhana
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
mosbah abdelkader | 13 Apr 2011 17:06
Picon

A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP

Hi,


I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the ASP and the 2 SGP.


Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?


I am using M3UA rfc3332.


Please help.


--
Best Regards
Abdelkader Mosbah
|Time     | 192.168.1.140                         | 192.168.1.170                         |
|         |                   | 192.168.1.145     |                   
|18,313   |         ASPUP     |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPUP 
|         |(2905)   ------------------>  (2905)   |                   |
|19,800   |         ASPUP_ACK |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPUP_ACK 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|22,594   |         NTFY      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): NTFY 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|32,169   |         ASPUP     |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPUP 
|         |(2905)   -------------------------------------->  (2905)   |
|33,728   |         ASPUP_ACK |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPUP_ACK 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|35,592   |         ASPAC     |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPAC 
|         |(2905)   ------------------>  (2905)   |                   |
|36,356   |         NTFY      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): NTFY 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|39,259   |         ASPAC_ACK |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPAC_ACK 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|41,836   |         NTFY      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): NTFY 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|43,780   |         ASPAC     |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPAC 
|         |(2905)   -------------------------------------->  (2905)   |
|47,132   |         ASPAC_ACK |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): ASPAC_ACK 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|49,643   |         NTFY      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): NTFY 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|54,189   |         DAUD      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAUD 
|         |(2905)   ------------------>  (2905)   |                   |
|63,508   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|63,901   |         DAUD      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAUD 
|         |(2905)   ------------------>  (2905)   |                   |
|67,152   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|67,234   |         DAUD      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAUD 
|         |(2905)   -------------------------------------->  (2905)   |
|72,078   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|73,798   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |
|75,091   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <--------------------------------------  (2905)   |
|76,634   |         DAVA      |                   |                   |M3UA (RFC 3332): DAVA 
|         |(2905)   <------------------  (2905)   |                   |

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 14 Apr 2011 02:26
Favicon

Re: A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP

mosbah,

What did you think was the matter with it?

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote:                     (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:06:57)
>    Hi,
>    I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP
>    (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the
>    ASP and the 2 SGP.
>    Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?
>    I am using M3UA rfc3332.
>    Please help.
>    --
>    Best Regards
>    Abdelkader Mosbah

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
mosbah abdelkader | 14 Apr 2011 06:23
Picon

Re: A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP

I want just to know if that config works with other implementations.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock <at> openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

What did you think was the matter with it?

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote:                     (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:06:57)
>    Hi,
>    I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP
>    (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the
>    ASP and the 2 SGP.
>    Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?
>    I am using M3UA rfc3332.
>    Please help.
>    --
>    Best Regards
>    Abdelkader Mosbah

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/

#avg_ls_inline_popup { position:absolute; z-index:9999; padding: 0px 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; width: 240px; overflow: hidden; word-wrap: break-word; color: black; font-size: 10px; text-align: left; line-height: 13px;}
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Jaddu, Suresh (NSN - IN/Bangalore | 14 Apr 2011 06:14

Re: A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP

it looks fine to me. I believe one SGP or more the initial message sequence will not change.
 
Suresh.
From: sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext mosbah abdelkader
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 8:37 PM
To: sigtran <at> ietf.org
Subject: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP

Hi,


I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the ASP and the 2 SGP.


Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?


I am using M3UA rfc3332.


Please help.


--
Best Regards
Abdelkader Mosbah
_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 14 Apr 2011 07:34
Favicon

Re: A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP

mosbah,

RFC 3332 is long obsolete.  Don't use it.  Your
implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable.

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote:                          (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:23:32)
>    I want just to know if that config works with other implementations.
>    On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
>    <[1]bidulock <at> openss7.org> wrote:
> 
>      mosbah,
>      What did you think was the matter with it?
>      --brian
>      mosbah abdelkader wrote:                     (Wed, 13 Apr 2011
>      16:06:57)
> 
>    >    Hi,
>    >    I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP
>    >    (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between
>    the
>    >    ASP and the 2 SGP.
>    >    Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?
>    >    I am using M3UA rfc3332.
>    >    Please help.
>    >    --
>    >    Best Regards
>    >    Abdelkader Mosbah

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |

Gmane