Subject: Re: [Megaco] Service change Restart

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 11:47:37 +0530

How about ServiceChange Restart on ROOT from MGC?Does the protocol inhibit it?
(It can be an easier means for the MGC to inform MG to delete all contexts
rather than 'Subtract'ing each of them, when MGC is taken gracefully
out-of-service)

Tom Taylor <[email-masked]> on 03/14/2003 12:27:35 AM

To:   Sachin Gupta-PNGN/HSS@HSS, Megaco List <[email-masked]>
cc:    (bcc: Kushanava Laha/HSS)

Subject:  Re: [Megaco] Service change Restart

I agree that it's very difficult to assign any real meaning to an MGC-initiated
restart of a termination.  My background in switch software development tells me
that a restart clears certain aspects of state.  However, that makes little
sense in
the Megaco case, because the MGC can do that directly by subtracting the
termination
from any context it is in and resetting descriptors if it is not in a context.

Conclusion: the only thing an MGC-initiated restart of a termination does is
change
its state to in-service if it is not already there.

[email-masked] wrote:
>
> Hi List
> I have a query regarding the processing of Service Change Restart.
> consider the following scenario:
>
> Termination is in state InService.
> Command recieved from MGC to Restart the termination (with or wothout delay).
>
> what MG could possibly do in this case?
>
>
> Thanks
> Sachin Gupta
>
[disclaimer snipped]

_______________________________________________
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: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:30:18 -0500

This is where the RFC is completely inadequate as it stands.  I wouldn't mind seeing 
it rewritten to specify separately what happens for ServiceChange on ROOT vs. 
ServiceChange on individual terminations.  With regard to the latter, there is also 
something else I'd like to see ironed out: the service state is a writable property 
in TerminationState, yet it is manipulated by ServiceChange.  One or the other of 
these should go.

I am quite prepared to submit a proposal for new text for section 7.2.8 in 
particular.  Would there be interest in reviewing such a proposal?  We could submit 
it as a contribution into SG 16's May meeting if that is workable.

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:30:18 -0500

---

From: Aleksandr Ryabin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:47:40 -0500

Hi,

SC only changes the service state.
Taking out of service MGC does not imply MG is taken out of service as well.
You can send wildcarded W-Subtract * on Context * which will kill all the 
active contexts.

Cheers.
         Aleks

---

From: Aleksandr Ryabin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:47:40 -0500

Hi,

Cheers.
         Aleks