Subject: [Sigtran] RE: IPSP-IPSP

From: "Javier Pastor-Balbas (ECE)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:17:27 +0200

Hi Reshma, 
 
See below...

-----Original Message-----
From: reshma [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 4:52 PM
To: Tolga Asveren; Javier Pastor-Balbas (ECE); [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: IPSP-IPSP

Hi Tolga/Javier,
 
 1) In single ended operation does AspId in ASPUP has any significance..?
If so when ASPUP clashes from 2 peer IPSPs AspIds might be different.Which might lead to misinterpretations later.Is there any need for AspIds in IPSPs? 
 
[JAVIER:] I'm afraid that ASPIds should be pre-configured. As ASPUP message should not be changed, I would suggest that the ASPid from the IPSP who is sending the ASPUP message is included there. Each IPSP should already know (IMO) by configuration the ASPid of the peer.
 
2) Problem with RK REG:If in case (as per Javier opinion) we support RK REG in IPSP.In single ended operation suppose IPSP1 sends RK REG with DPC 1-1-1 and OPC 2-2-2  and IPSP2 Responds with successfully registered.Then for data from IPSP1 to IPSP2 we will have to compare the DPC with OPC and vice versa.Whereas for the data from IPSP2 to IPSP1 we will compare DPC with DPC and OPC with OPC .This changes the behavior of IPSP at 2 ends,which is not correct.Then how can we support RK REG?
 
[JAVIER:] I don't see a major problem here. Each IPSP handles local SPCs and remote SPCs. In this way the local RK will be seen different at each peer. RKs will be composed of <OPC, DPC> where OPC=remoteSPC and DPC=localSPC. If one node registers a RK at the peer node it has to take into account that the RK expresses the messages that the peer has to send to it, that is, the sending node will set <OPC, DPC> where OPC=remoteSPC and DPC=localSPC (local refers to the sending node).
 
Cheers // Javier.

Thanks,
reshma

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

---

From: "Tolga Asveren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:36:22 -0400

Javier,
> If so when ASPUP clashes from 2 peer IPSPs AspIds might be
> different.Which might lead to misinterpretations later.Is there
> any need for AspIds in IPSPs?
>
> [JAVIER:] I'm afraid that ASPIds should be pre-configured. As
> ASPUP message should not be changed, I would suggest that the
> ASPid from the IPSP who is sending the ASPUP message is included
> there. Each IPSP should already know (IMO) by configuration the
> ASPid of the peer.
[TOLGA] I think, still 2 ASPUP can be exchanged for the SE case, this will
allow to use AspId as in the ASP/SGP case. We still refer to this model as
SE because of historical reasons but this is not very approapriate, the real
difference between SE and DE was, one of them is point-to-point M3UA
endpoints (DE), whereas the other one is point-to-point between AS(SE)(BTW,
this reply does not mean that I started to like SE IPSP model :-) )

---

From: "reshma" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 22:13:09 +0530

Hi Javier,

> If so when ASPUP clashes from 2 peer IPSPs AspIds might be different.Which
might lead to misinterpretations later.Is there any need for AspIds in
IPSPs?
>
> [JAVIER:] I'm afraid that ASPIds should be pre-configured. As ASPUP
message should not be changed, I would suggest that the ASPid from the IPSP
who is sending the ASPUP message is included there. Each IPSP should already
know (IMO) by configuration the ASPid of the peer.

[Reshma] When there is only one ASPUP (if there is no clash)between two
peers how
AspId will be exchanged then?

>
> 2) Problem with RK REG:If in case (as per Javier opinion) we support RK
REG in IPSP.In single ended operation suppose IPSP1 sends RK REG with DPC
1-1-1 and OPC 2-2-2  and IPSP2 Responds with successfully registered.Then
for data from IPSP1 to IPSP2 we will have to compare the DPC with OPC and
vice versa.Whereas for the data from IPSP2 to IPSP1 we will compare DPC with
DPC and OPC with OPC .This changes the behavior of IPSP at 2 ends,which is
not correct.Then how can we support RK REG?
>
> [JAVIER:] I don't see a major problem here. Each IPSP handles local SPCs
and remote SPCs. In this way the local RK will be seen different at each
peer. RKs will be composed of <OPC, DPC> where OPC=remoteSPC and
DPC=localSPC. If one node registers a RK at the peer node it has to take
into account that the RK expresses the messages that the peer has to send to
it, that is, the sending node will set <OPC, DPC> where OPC=remoteSPC and
DPC=localSPC (local refers to the sending node).

[Reshma] Do you mean when RK REG is sent from IPSP1 to IPSP2
RK is OPC 1-1-1 and DPC 2-2-2 at IPSP1 and
          OPC 2-2-2 and DPC 1-1-1 at IPSP2 ?

Thanks,
Reshma