Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

From: Raphael Tryster <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 16:56:53 +0200

I don't know if Nuno's second posting was answered privately, but I am also
confused some of these definitions.  I would appreciate if someone could
correct those of my assumptions that are wrong.

medGwyGatewayConfigEntry is described as "Entry holding configuration
information about a group of Media Gateway Controllers sharing the same
signaling link."  I take this to mean that the list of primary and secondary
MGCs with which an MG can communicate, may be divided into several groups,
such that each group of MGCs sees the MG as having a different IP address
and port.  If this is true, why is it useful?

medGwyGatewayLinkName is described as "Name of this media gateway control
group."  Why does a group of MGCs need a name?

According to my interpretation above, each group represented by
MedGwyGatewayConfigEntry should relate to one or more entries in
medGwyGatewayControllerTable.  "An Entry in this Table is automatically
created when a manager creates an entry in the medGwyGatewayConfigTable".
Why "an" entry, rather than "one or more" entries?

Perhaps the same question in different phrasing:  How many objects of type
medGwyGatewayControllerEntry can exist for each unique set of INDEX {
medGwyGatewayId, medGwyGatewayLinkId }?

Raphael Tryster

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Nuno Silva [SMTP:[email-masked]]
	Sent:	Monday, 10 June, 2002 1:14 AM
	To:	'Balasubramanian Pitchandi '; Nuno Silva; [email-masked] '
	Subject:	RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

	Hi Bala,

	 Many thanks for your answers.

	You say the signaling/transport link is the link between MGCs. My
first
	(wrong!) interpretation was that this was the link between a MG and
a MGC,
	for example, for Q.931 signaling backhaul. 

	 So, if I take your signaling link interpretation, I have several
doubts:

	A)is it possible to have more than 2 MGCs sharing the same link?
What for?
	How is exactly this signaling link defined?

	B) Are these (2 or more?)MGCs the ones that are SET by the NMS in
the
	medGwyGatewayControllerTable, for a given MG, or could be any
others?

	C) If this is the MG mib, why are there tables containing info about
the
	link between (2 or more?)MGCs? Shouldn't this be part of the MGC
mib?

	D)Also, this link is created by the manager for each MG - see
	medGwyLinkIdTable. Why is this done on the MG mib?

	 I think I haven't understood this "link" stuff ...

	 Thanks ahead. Nuno.

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Balasubramanian Pitchandi
	To: 'Nuno Silva'; [email-masked]
	Sent: 08-06-2002 01:37
	Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

	Hello,

	Please see my responses below [BP].

	Thanks,
	Bala
	 
	-----Original Message-----
	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of
	Nuno Silva
	Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:35 AM
	To: [email-masked]
	Cc: Nuno Silva
	Subject: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

	Hi, 

	 I found the mib-03 draft hard to read. I have a few questions:

	1 - As far as I have understood this mib is referring only to the
MG.
	What
	about MGC mib?
	[BP] Yes, that's correct. I am working on putting a new MIB which
would
	have two different MIBs - one for Media Gateway and the other for
Media
	Gateway Controller.

	2 - medGwyGatewayConfigTable:
	 - the description of the medGwayGatewayConfigEntry object says
"Entry
	holding info about a group of MGCs sharing the same signalling
link". Is
	this signalling link the SIGTRAN link? Is it possible to have
several
	MGCs
	sharing the same signalling link? What for?
	[BP] It refers to any type of signaling that could exist between the
	MGCs. It could be SIGTRAN if that's the case in your implementation.

	3 - medGwyGatewayStatsTable:
	- the medGwyGatewayTransportNumLosses refers a transport link. Is
this
	the
	SIGTRAN link?
	[BP] Same as above.

	4- There's a reference in the medGwyPropertyProfileTable to package
	mibs. Is
	there any info about this?
	[BP] The package MIBs are still to be developed.

	5 - The distribution of functionality between MEGACO and SNMP is
also
	not
	very clear to me. It seems there is some overlapping. What do you
think?
	[BP] Yes, there is some overlapping. Its being worked on.

	 Thanks ahead. Nuno.

	PS: is there any other good source of information for understanding
the
	megaco mib? management requirements, other mails, ...

	[BP] Megaco MIB is a work in progress and I along with the help of
the
	Megaco community would come up with a new and improved version of
the
	MIB soon.

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

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

---

From: "Balasubramanian Pitchandi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:18:23 -0400

Hi Raphael,

I don't remember if I answered Nuno's queries then. Anyway, please see
my responses below marked as [BP].

I have been delaying the new MIB draft for quite a while and I think I
should bring it out soon for comments. It would cover all this
ambiguities and make things clearer.

Thanks,

Bala

-----Original Message-----
From: Raphael Tryster [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:57 AM
To: Nuno Silva; 'Balasubramanian Pitchandi '; [email-masked] '
Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

I don't know if Nuno's second posting was answered privately, but I am
also confused some of these definitions.  I would appreciate if someone
could correct those of my assumptions that are wrong.

medGwyGatewayConfigEntry is described as "Entry holding configuration
information about a group of Media Gateway Controllers sharing the same
signaling link."  I take this to mean that the list of primary and
secondary MGCs with which an MG can communicate, may be divided into
several groups, such that each group of MGCs sees the MG as having a
different IP address and port.  If this is true, why is it useful?

[BP] medGwyGatewayConfigEntry actually represents a group of "Media
Gateways" that share the common signaling link. NOT the MGCs.
medGwyGatewayControllerEntry is the one which represents the group of
MGCs. It's a mistake in the MIB draft.

medGwyGatewayLinkName is described as "Name of this media gateway
control group."  Why does a group of MGCs need a name?

[BP] Assuming that there can be many virtual MGs within one physical
MGs, this "LinkName" is used to identify them together. Its an optional
feature that the system administrator can choose to ignore.

According to my interpretation above, each group represented by
MedGwyGatewayConfigEntry should relate to one or more entries in
medGwyGatewayControllerTable.  "An Entry in this Table is automatically
created when a manager creates an entry in the
medGwyGatewayConfigTable".  Why "an" entry, rather than "one or more"
entries?

[BP] I hope the above explanation would make this point clear.

Perhaps the same question in different phrasing:  How many objects of
type medGwyGatewayControllerEntry can exist for each unique set of INDEX
{ medGwyGatewayId, medGwyGatewayLinkId }?

Raphael Tryster 

-----Original Message----- 
From:   Nuno Silva [SMTP:[email-masked]] 
Sent:   Monday, 10 June, 2002 1:14 AM 
To:     'Balasubramanian Pitchandi '; Nuno Silva; [email-masked] ' 
Subject:        RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts 

Hi Bala, 

 Many thanks for your answers . 

You say the signaling/transport link is the link between MGCs. My first 
(wrong!) interpretation was that this was the link between a MG and a
MGC, 
for example, for Q.931 signaling backhaul. 

A)is it possible to have more than 2 MGCs sharing the same link? What
for? 
How is exactly this signaling link defined? 

B) Are these (2 or more?)MGCs the ones that are SET by the NMS in the 
medGwyGatewayControllerTable, for a given MG, or could be any others? 

C) If this is the MG mib, why are there tables containing info about the

link between (2 or more?)MGCs? Shouldn't this be part of the MGC mib? 

 Thanks ahead. Nuno. 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Balasubramanian Pitchandi 
To: 'Nuno Silva'; [email-masked] 
Sent: 08-06-2002 01:37 
Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts 

Hello, 

Please see my responses below [BP] . 

Thanks, 
Bala 
  
-----Original Message----- 
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of 
Nuno Silva 
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:35 AM 
To: [email-masked] 
Cc: Nuno Silva 
Subject: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts 

Hi, 

1 - As far as I have understood this mib is referring only to the MG. 
What 
about MGC mib? 
[BP] Yes, that's correct. I am working on putting a new MIB which would 
have two different MIBs - one for Media Gateway and the other for Media 
Gateway Controller. 

2 - medGwyGatewayConfigTable: 
 - the description of the medGwayGatewayConfigEntry object says "Entry 
holding info about a group of MGCs sharing the same signalling link". Is

this signalling link the SIGTRAN link? Is it possible to have several 
MGCs 
sharing the same signalling link? What for? 
[BP] It refers to any type of signaling that could exist between the 
MGCs. It could be SIGTRAN if that's the case in your implementation. 

3 - medGwyGatewayStatsTable: 
- the medGwyGatewayTransportNumLosses refers a transport link. Is this 
the 
SIGTRAN link? 
[BP] Same as above. 

5 - The distribution of functionality between MEGACO and SNMP is also 
not 
very clear to me. It seems there is some overlapping. What do you think?

 Thanks ahead. Nuno. 

PS: is there any other good source of information for understanding the 
megaco mib? management requirements, other mails, ... 

[BP] Megaco MIB is a work in progress and I along with the help of the 
Megaco community would come up with a new and improved version of the 
MIB soon.

---

From: "Balasubramanian Pitchandi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:18:23 -0400

Hi Raphael,

Thanks,

Bala

-----Original Message-----
From: Raphael Tryster [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:57 AM
To: Nuno Silva; 'Balasubramanian Pitchandi '; [email-masked] '
Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts

Raphael Tryster 

-----Original Message----- 
From:   Nuno Silva [SMTP:[email-masked]] 
Sent:   Monday, 10 June, 2002 1:14 AM 
To:     'Balasubramanian Pitchandi '; Nuno Silva; [email-masked] ' 
Subject:        RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts 

Hi Bala, 

 Thanks ahead. Nuno. 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Balasubramanian Pitchandi 
To: 'Nuno Silva'; [email-masked] 
Sent: 08-06-2002 01:37 
Subject: RE: [Megaco] MEGACO mib - doubts 

Hello, 

Thanks, 
Bala 
  
-----Original Message----- 

Hi, 

 Thanks ahead. Nuno.