Subject: [Megaco] call flow for fault calls

From: "Pavesi, Valdemar Moreira" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:55:24 -0200

Dears, 

I will execute tests for new equipment Residential Gateway developed to
work with protocol Megaco.

I need some call flows for fault calls , for example :

Events

Cause

EventID:       cause (0x0001)

Generic error event

EventsDescriptor parameters:  None

ObservedEvents Descriptor Parameters:

General Cause

ParameterID: Generalcause (0x0001)

This parameter groups the failures into six groups, which the MGC may
act upon.

Type: enumeration

Possible values:

                "NR" Normal Release (0x0001)
          "UR" Unavailable Resources (0x0002)
          "FT" Failure, Temporary (0x0003)
          "FP" Failure, Permanent (0x0004)
          "IW" Interworking Error (0x0005)
          "UN" Unsupported (0x0006)

Would you please help me with this issue? 

Thank you !

Valdemar Moreira Pavesi

Email: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 

Tel 55 41 341 5094

Brazil-Curitiba

 

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

---

From: "Kevin Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 06:55:31 -0500

Call flows for fault calls?  How fault scenarios would be exercised in a
test plan would depend heavily on the implementations involved.  It may be
that it is impossible to test some fault scenarios without the introduction
of code specifically to produce the fault.  I would argue that such code
would actually not be a fault, as it would execute normally to produce the
"fault".
 
This is exactly the case with certain testcases that are meant to test
correct inclusion of error codes.  For example, I have seen a test plan that
has a case to test for the correct inclusion of error code 500 "Internal
Software Error".  How, exactly, does one create an internal software error
upon demand?  If it were possible, it would mean that the implementation has
code that makes the message come out.  It seems that execution of that code
would then be working correctly, and wouldn't be an error at all.  It is
this kind of conformance testing that should be avoided, as it does not
really test the conformance or function of the implementation -- only the
capability of the implementation to produce arbitrary messaging upon demand.
It is much better to describes the scenarios that should be supported (cable
pulls, restart recovery, etc.), and test to see that the function of the
implementation is correct.
 
Kevin

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Pavesi, Valdemar Moreira
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 7:55 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Megaco] call flow for fault calls

Dears, 

I will execute tests for new equipment Residential Gateway developed to work
with protocol Megaco.

Events

Cause

EventID:       cause (0x0001)

Generic error event

General Cause

This parameter groups the failures into six groups, which the MGC may act
upon.

Type: enumeration

Possible values:

 

 

Thank you !

Valdemar Moreira Pavesi

Email:  <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]

Tel 55 41 341 5094

Brazil-Curitiba