Subject: [SUA issue 25] section 1.3.1 comments - closed

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:35:03 +0300

Hi Sandeep,

> From Section 1.3.1.1
> Address information in CLDT message (e.g. TC_Query) from SGP 
> to ASP,with association ID = SG-ASP, Stream ID based on SLS and possibly 
> other parameters, e.g. OPC or Network ID"
> >> In above statement SLS should be replaced with sequence control.

Corrected.

> 
> From Section 1.3.1.2
> GT Translation yields an "SCCP entity set", which now may 
> contain one or more AS's.
> 1. GT translation does not return "SCCP entity set" but only 
> return single SCCP entity.

Corrected.

> 2. Draft should not recommend hooking SUA into SCCP's GTT 
> function, but rather transport the SCCP/SCCP-User interface
> per the SIGTRAN architecture.

Corrected.  I modified it to state:

" ... from which one or more AS's can be derived.  Selection of the AS is
thus based on the SCCP called party address  (and possibly other SS7
parameters depending on the implementation)."  

> SCCP at SG receives UDT/XUDT/LUDT message through local MTP3 
> Parameter Routing Indicator is set to Route on GT. Global Title 
> procedure is initiated at SCCP, GT translation result in RI = Route 
> on GT. As SCCP does not pass this message to its local users, how 
> should/can message of this type be delivered to SUA.

This is part of the implementation of SCCP/SUA at the SG.  

John

---
You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:41:41 +0530

John ,

A few comments ..

Best Regards,
-Sandeep

[email-masked] on 08/28/2001 07:05:03 PM

To:   Sandeep Mahajan/HSS@HSS, [email-masked]
cc:

Subject:  [SUA issue 25] section 1.3.1 comments - closed

Hi Sandeep,

Corrected.

Corrected.

Sandeep >> If GTT only results in one SCCP entity, this can point to only one
AS. So only one AS can be derived.

Sandeep >> This is being discussed in another thread. This relates to definition
of SUA interface with NIF. My understanding was that adaptation layers at SG
needs to transport interface boundary between 2 layers , SCCP and SCCP User in
case of SUA. Definition of upper layer primitives in section 1.6 seems to
suggest that and it was enough for an SUA implementation to support only these
primitives for SG as endpoint case. But the same is not enough for supporting SG
as relay case. I think SUA should be suggesting these new primitives and some
procedures required in SUA for supporting SG as relay case.

John

---

---

From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:38:28 -0500

Sandeep, John,

Please see comments below....

[email-masked] wrote: (Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:41:41)
[snip]
> AS. So only one AS can be derived.

I agree with Sandeep: it should be clearly state that translation results
in a single AS.  It might result in multiple ASPs from which one ASP is
selected, but not multiple ASs.
> as relay case.

Sure they are sufficient.  IN the SG as relay case, all relaying can be
performed in the SCCP at the SG.  The SG need only support SCCP/SCCP-User
interface towards the ASP.

> I think SUA should be suggesting these new primitives and some

None required.  We can pick this up on the other thread if you would like...
And let this issue thread close...

--brian

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email-masked]
http://www.openss7.org/

---

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:10:54 +0300

Hi Brian,

> selected, but not multiple ASs.

It now says:

" ... from which an AS can be derived."

John

---