Subject: [Megaco] 909 Reason

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 07:55:51 +0300

Hi,

I have a question on the 909 (MGC Impending failure) reason code.

Chapter 11.5 says that if a MG notices a MGC failure, it sends a SVC to
another (if any) MGC, using the 'Failover' method and the 909 (MGC
Impending Failure) reason code.

Annex L, chapter L.6.2.10, says that the sender will go out-of-service
and is unable to handle new transactions.

Why?????????

Why will the MG not be able to handle new transactions just because if
contacts a new MGC????

Regards,

Christer Holmberg
Ericsson Finland

_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 15:45:34 +1000

Hello Christer,

I agree the 909 text is misleading in this case. The title "MGC Impending
Failure" is clear. The term "sender" in this case isn't. I think what you are
after is that the term "sender" is replaced by "The MGC".

Regards, Christian

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 15:45:34 +1000

Hello Christer,

Regards, Christian

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:19:26 +0300

Hi,

Well, so it would be "The MGC will go out-of-service and is unable to handle new
transactions".

Is there even a "out-of-service" state defined for the MGC?

Also, if we talk about the MGC state here, I guess it should also be said that
the state changes to "in-service" again when the MGC is able to receive a
"Disconnected" SVC.

Regards,

Christer Holmberg
Ericsson Finland

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:19:26 +0300

Hi,

Regards,

Christer Holmberg
Ericsson Finland