Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: IPSP proposed text (1st approach)]

From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 08:00:33 -0600

Dennis,

No, what I'm saying is that there are many
situations where one group of AS that live
and die together will do, not requiring RC.

But who cares if you cannot get away without
using RC all of the time?  The procedure is
there to include RC when it is necessary.

If you use RC3 for AS100:3 to AS201 on any
of the 4 associations, have IPSP1 or IPSP2
send ASPIA whenever it wants for RC3.  The
same is true for AS201 to AS100:3.  The major
point is you only need one RC value to
describe the traffic between a pair of AS--not
two values as the double-ended procedure would
have you do.

--brian

Dennis Niermann wrote:                                     (Wed, 31 Oct 2001 07:45:01)
> Hi Brian,
> I do not see your point.
> All three AS(s) serviced by IPSP1
> and IPSP2 are for one point code but different SIs.
> But that is only one example and is not the point.
> Once again, if the ASPAC message can not be used to 
> tell the external world which of the ASPs is currently
> actively handling an AS, how do you do it?
> 
> Are you saying that for the IPSP-IPSP case that
> an ASP can only handle one AS? Or, that an AS can 
> only be handled by one ASP?
> 
> /Dennis
> 
> 
> 
> "Brian F. G. Bidulock" wrote:
> > 
> > Dennis,
> > 
> > I don't think your example is a very good one.
> > You certainly cannot not mix PC granularity and
> > SI granularity RKs and have a point-to-point
> > arrangement.
> > 
> > --brian
> > 
> > Dennis Niermann wrote:                                     (Wed, 31 Oct 2001 07:16:39)
> > > Brian,
> > > You did not at all address the question I pose.
> > > Using the diagram below, IPSP3 wants to send
> > > data to AS100:3.  IPSP1 and IPSP2 are the two
> > > possible ASPs that service that AS, but in
> > > override mode.
> > > The typical M3UA message for communicating
> > > "I am the ASP that is actively serving this/these
> > > AS(s)" is the ASPAC message. If IPSP1 and IPSP2
> > > are not allowed to send an ASPAC message,
> > > how does a remote node (IPSP3) know whether to
> > > send AS100:3 data to IPSP1 or to IPSP2?
> > >
> > > /Dennis
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brian F. G. Bidulock" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dennis,
> > > >
> > > > None of the UA drafts address how AS distribute messages
> > > > over ASPs or visa versa.  It is expected that the ASPs
> > > > have inter ASP communication and share AS state when
> > > > they jointly serve an AS.
> > > >
> > > > So if IPSP1 looses connection(?) to AS100:3 it should
> > > > have a chat with IPSP2.
> > > >
> > > > What you are trying to build here is a multi-point-to-
> > > > multi-point configuration, rather than the point-to-point
> > > > configuration proscribed in the draft.  But, keep trying.
> > > >
> > > > --brian
> > > >
> > > > Dennis Niermann wrote:                                     (Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:46:17)
> > > > > resending...
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Brian,
> > > > > I agree there is no problem with distributing SSNM messages.
> > > > > The issue is if IPSP3 has data to send to AS100:3.
> > > > > How does it know to send it to IPSP1 or IPSP2?
> > > > > If they work in override mode, only one is actively
> > > > > handling traffic for AS100:3.
> > > > > /Dennis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Brian F. G. Bidulock" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dennis,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is still no need (or requirement) for RC in
> > > > > > your illustration.  Each IPSP can activate for all
> > > > > > the AS that it supports (ASPAC without RC).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then, for example, if IPSP3 loses connection to
> > > > > > AS201, it is ok to send DUNA(201) to IPSP1 and IPSP2.
> > > > > > If you draw the same diagram with AS(PC201/SI3), then
> > > > > > IPSP3 can send DUPU.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you come up with a configuration where RC is
> > > > > > 'required' considering the point-to-point nature of
> > > > > > IPSPs?  It is not required in this configuration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --brian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dennis Niermann wrote:                                     (Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:24:54)
> > > > > > > Hi Brian,
> > > > > > > Thanks for the challenge!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Brian F. G. Bidulock" wrote:
> > > > > > >   <snip>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It is going to be tough finding a case where RC is needed at
> > > > > > > > all for point-to-point IPSP.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe that the following is legal since an ASP can service
> > > > > > > more than one AS and an AS can be serviced by more than one ASP:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Figure 4:  IPSP - IPSP, multiple AS's
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >      +------+                                  +------+
> > > > > > >      |      |                                  |      |
> > > > > > >      | AS   |                                  | AS   |
> > > > > > >      | 100:4|                                  | 201  |
> > > > > > >      |      | \                              / |      |
> > > > > > >      +------+   \  +-----+   IP   +-----+  /   +------+
> > > > > > >                   /       \------/       \
> > > > > > >      +------+     | IPSP1 |      | IPSP3 |     +------+
> > > > > > >      |      +- - -\       /-+   /\       /- - -+      |
> > > > > > >      | AS   |      +-----+   \ /  +-----+      | AS   |
> > > > > > >      | 100:3|                 \                | 200  |
> > > > > > >      |      |      +-----+   / \  +-----+      |      |
> > > > > > >      |      +- - -/       \-+   \/       \- - -+      |
> > > > > > >      +------+     | IPSP2 |      | IPSP4 |     +------+
> > > > > > >                   \       /------\       /
> > > > > > >      +------+   /  +---- +        +-----+  \   +------+
> > > > > > >      |      | /                              \ |      |
> > > > > > >      | AS   |                                  | AS   |
> > > > > > >      | 100:5|                                  | 202  |
> > > > > > >      |      |                                  |      |
> > > > > > >      +------+                                  +------+
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it supported for an IPSP to handle AS's with different point codes?
> > > > > > > Anyway, let's assume that the AS100:3, AS100:4, and AS100:5 all
> > > > > > > use the same point code but have different service indicators.
> > > > > > > Doesn't this require IPSP1 and IPSP2 to communicate what traffic
> > > > > > > they are handling.  E.g. by IPSP1 activating the RCs for AS100:4 and
> > > > > > > AS100:3 and IPSP2 activating the RC for AS100:5. Otherwise, how will
> > > > > > > IPSP3 and IPSP4 know where to send traffic?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,  Dennis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Brian F. G. Bidulock
> > > > > > [email-masked]
> > > > > > http://www.openss7.org/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >  Dennis Niermann              [email-masked]
> > > > >  Ericsson Network Systems
> > > > >  Richardson, Tx 75081
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Brian F. G. Bidulock
> > > > [email-masked]
> > > > http://www.openss7.org/
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> > >
> > > --
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >  Dennis Niermann              [email-masked]
> > >  Ericsson Network Systems
> > >  Richardson, Tx 75081
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> > 
> > --
> > Brian F. G. Bidulock
> > [email-masked]
> > http://www.openss7.org/
> > 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>  Dennis Niermann              [email-masked]
>  Ericsson Network Systems   
>  Richardson, Tx 75081
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]

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

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