Subject: RE: [Megaco] Inconsistency in the spec concerning SVC with method failover

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 12:22:16 -0500

I suggest referencing the ITU docs.  They are actively edited and kept up to
date.  The IETF documents are not actively updated.

Kevin 

-----Original Message-----
From: Chirayu Patel [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 2:25 AM
To: Boyle, Kevin [NCRTP:3Z40:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Megaco] Inconsistency in the spec concerning SVC with method
failover

1. The text is quoted from draft-ietf-megaco-h248v2-04.txt. 
2. The Nov 2004 IG for H.248.x v2 does not have a fix.
3. Wasn't aware of Annex F. Thanks. 

CP

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:51:47 -0500, "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
said:
> First, what document are you looking at? Second, have you checked the 
> IG to see if this is fixed? Third, Annex F will discuss all the 
> ServiceChange function in detail once it is incorporated into H.248.1 
> v3, and v3 consents in August.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of Chirayu Patel
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:21 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Megaco] Inconsistency in the spec concerning SVC with 
> methodfailover
> 
> 
> Section 7.2.8 mentions
> 
>       Failover - sent from MG to MGC to indicate the primary MG is out
>       of service and a secondary MG is taking over. This serviceChange
>       method is also sent from the MG to the MGC when the MG detects
>       that MGC has failed.
> 
> Annex D.1.5 mentions
> 
>       In order to account for the possibility of an undetected or in
>       progress "failover", we modify the classic algorithm so that if
>       the Media Gateway receives a valid ServiceChange message
>       announcing a failover, it will start transmitting outstanding
>       commands to that new MGC.
> 
> Annex D.1.5 implies that MGC will send failover to MG whereas Section
> 7.2.8
> mention that failover is always sent from MG to MGC.
> 
> I think the Annex is in error and should be corrected and the 
> aforementioned lines should be replaced with text similar to.
> 
>       MG should transmit a Service Change with method failover to the
>       secondary MGC when it detects a broken association . On successful
>       completion of the Service Change procedure the MG SHOULD
>       retransmit outstanding commands to the new MGC. All outstanding
>       commands received from the failed MGC SHOULD be aborted.
> 
> regards,
> 
> CP
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Megaco mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
> 

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