Subject: [Megaco] [Megaco]Resending - Primary MGC Failure And Contacting Secondar y MGC

From: "Kaul, Bharat" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:20:51 -0700

Resending to solicit comments :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Kaul, Bharat [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:50 AM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: [Megaco] Primary MGC Failure And Contacting Secondary MGC

Assume following scenario

*	Primary MGC knows it is going down and wants to inform MGs it
controls that it is going down
*	Primary MGC has no knowledge of other MGCs in the network
*	MGs in the network may be configured with secondary MGCs

How does primary MGC inform MGs about impending failure ?  I think MGC
should send method as "handoff" with reason as "MGC Impending Failure" and
not specify ServiceChangeMgcId.

Is that correct ?

- Thanks
   Bharat

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Bharat Kaul,                            Trillium Digital Systems Inc.,
Engineering Project Manager,   An Intel Division,
Phone: 310 481 5515,              12100 Wilshire Blvd, #1800,
<http://www.trillium.com>         Los Angeles, CA - 90025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------

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

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:23:07 +0530

hi

I have a doubt regarding the network scenario that you are refering to.

1.   If you are saying that the MGC is unaware of the presence of any other MGC
in the network, then does that mean that there exists no redundant (backup) MGC
in the network, which could take over the control of the failing MGC for the MG?

     If yes, then in this scenario, the the ServiceChangeMethod being sent by
the failing MGC must be FORCED so that calls running at MG could be cleared
taking into account the billing aspect.

2.   Would MGC assume that the MG may be configured with the secondary MGCs? If
yes, are you also assuming that the failing MGC knows that  MG is aware about
the fact whether the secondary MGCs are redundant or not??

     Such assumption is very difficult to be made as far as the configuration of
MG and MGC are concerned.

regards
vivek

"Kaul, Bharat" <[email-masked]> on 07/23/2002 02:50:51 AM

To:   "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
cc:    (bcc: Vivek Bansal/HSS)

Subject:  [Megaco] [Megaco]Resending -  Primary MGC Failure And Contacting
      Secondar y MGC

-----Original Message-----
From: Kaul, Bharat [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:50 AM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: [Megaco] Primary MGC Failure And Contacting Secondary MGC

Is that correct ?

- Thanks
   Bharat