Subject: [IPTEL] IPTEL TRIP-GW draft

From: Manjunath Bangalore <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:58:35 -0800

The next version of the TRIP-GW draft is now available. Not sure if the
submission made on Wednesday, 11/21 made it to the archive. You can pick
up a copy from
ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/dhaval/draft-rs-trip-gw-03.txt

Regards,
Manjunath Bangalore
 (Manjax)

_______________________________________________
IPTEL mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/iptel

---

From: "ANDERSON, DARBY (SBCTI)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:41:14 -0600

(If Ive sent this 2x, My appologies)

k...    Ive kinda been outta the loop for a couple weeks, but I just barely
saw the newest draft, and had some Q's bout routing...

Are we no longer routing on ITAD #'s, and now routing on FG-B/D CIC's??
What if someone outpulses digits to a gateway with a FG-D CIC in it, will
the gateway route the call on that CIC, or will there be some type of a
parameter in either the Voice G/W, or the RouteServ to implicitly deny
FG-B/FG-D Dial arrounds??

Also in reguards to trunking, how will TG's be tracked on the RouteServ for
traffic sculpting, and billing purposes??

-----Original Message-----
From: Manjunath Bangalore [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:59 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [IPTEL] IPTEL TRIP-GW draft

Regards,
Manjunath Bangalore
 (Manjax)

---

From: Manjunath S Bangalore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:04:58 -0800

Before Carrier Codes were introduced in TRIP-GW, routing was done primarily on
telephony prefixes. With Carrier information advertised in TRIP-GW as described
in the new draft, calls can be routed using a combination of the two.

 With carrier information being advertised in TRIP-GW, the Location Server has
information about the different carriers on which a given telephony prefix can
be terminated on. There will possibly be a Carrier-based routing policy in
place for the provider's domain as a whole which will determine which carrier
to use for a call. This could be a result of different factors like agreements
that exist between the ITSP and different Carriers, based on matching the
inbound and outbound carriers, based on the number of minutes terminated on a
carrier, Percentage-based distribution to different carriers, Least cost
considerations, etc.

> FG-B/FG-D Dial arrounds??

When the GW receives a call with a particular CIC, like you mentioned, that
information will be used in conjunction with the prefix to arrive at a route(s)
that terminate on the indicated carrier.  The LS/Proxy processing such a call
will forward it to domains that have advertised routes for that prefix
terminating on that carrier.

> traffic sculpting, and billing purposes??

A Route Server can keep informed about TrunkGroups by propogating the
information from the gateways on I-TRIP as described in the draft Or it can be
provisioned by ways, outside of TRIP, by static means, for example.

The new draft introduces the concept of a Carrier to facilitate Routing based
on Carrier preferences. Secondly, it provides the flexibility to report dynamic
characteristics of the gateway at the granularity of a Carrier or Carrier/Trunk
group combination to pave the way for scalable gateway management.

Regards,
-Manjax