Subject: RE: [Sigtran] M3UA IG v04

From: Ken Morneault <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 09:55:53 -0400

Francois,

Pls see comments below.

Regards,

Ken

At 10:15 AM 7/9/2003 +0200, Zannin, Francois wrote:
>Just some comment about the M3UA IG v04
>
>3.21 NOTIFY messages are missing in Examples section
>Figure (section 5.1.2)
>        a NOTIFY(AS-INACTIVE) must be sent from SGP to ASP2 after the
>ASP Up Ack
>
>Figure (section 5.1.3)
>        a NOTIFY(AS-INACTIVE) must be sent from SGP to ASP2 after the
>ASP Up Ack
>
>Figure (section 5.1.4)
>        Same remark, the Notify is sent to ASP1, ASP2 and also need to
>be sent to 
>      ASP3 after the ASP Up Ack

NOTIFY is only sent upon "a change in status of a particular Application Server".

>Another remark about the RC in the ASPTM:
>Is the ASP serves several AS are the RC(s) mandatory in the ASP-ACTIVE?
>In an old mail without any answer, it was said that :
>
>  Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Fw: absence of NA in ASP Active (march 03)
>    Sibi,
>    ....
>    When Routing Context is not provided, the ASP is activated for the
>single 
>    AS for which it is configured or an error returned if the ASP is not
>
>    configured for a single AS.
>    --brian
>
>In the RFC 3332, it is said:
>
>   It is not necessary for the ASP to
>   include all Routing Contexts of interest in a single ASP Active
>   message, thus requesting to become active in all Routing Contexts at
>   the same time.  Multiple ASP Active messages MAY be used to activate
>   within the Application Servers independently, or in sets.  In the
>   case where an ASP Active message does not contain a Routing Context
>   parameter, the receiver must know, via configuration data, which
>   Application Server(s) the ASP is a member.
>
>Given that there is no reference to that item in the IG, is an ASPTM is
>received 
>from an ASP that serves several AS, is it considered as an ACTIVE for
>ALL AS or 
>must we return an error ?

I agree with Brian's response to this question.

>Francois Z.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: J.Javier Pastor (EE/EEM) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 10:50 AM
>To: J.Javier Pastor (EE/EEM); [email-masked]
>Subject: RE: [Sigtran] M3UA IG v04
>
>
>
>It seems that finally it went through.... (Better late than never) :-D
>
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sigtran-m3ua-implementors
>-guide-04.txt
>
>Cheers // Javier.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sigtran mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran 

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