Subject: Re: AW: AW: Basic Package and NAS

From: Faad Ghoraishi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 11:16:17 -0400

>As I've said many times, where is this need? Can you quantify it or
>describe in real terms what would break if you didn't have this
>capability? ISP's using MEGACO precursors don't have this requirement
>today.

The present deployments CANNOT have this capability.
You want to know the needs:

1. Cheaper MGs
2. Simpler AAA data provisoning procedures if its done in MGC once for
all MGs it controls.
3. More efficient use of SS7 trunk facilities. The MGC immediatly release
the incoming call if it know of the MG's AAA interface failure.
4. Automatic Call Control can be initiated by MGC if #2 occures.

Faad Ghoraishi
*******************

Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]> on 10/13/99 10:27:20 AM

Please respond to Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]>

To:   [email-masked]
cc:    (bcc: Faad Ghoraishi/Bellcore)
Subject:  Re: AW: AW: Basic Package and NAS

At 09:56 AM 10/13/99 -0400, Faad Ghoraishi wrote:

>Matt I wish you would stop accusing people of not knowing and answer the
>question.

I'm sorry, but you keep making statements that make it seem like
you don't understand how NAS's or ISP's work. Your message below
is full of misunderstandings (or so I interpret them). I'll try
to address a few below.

>When I say that the MGC needs to be in control of all aspects of NAS call
>setup.
>This does not mean that it is going to do AAA/L2TP etc., but it needs to be in
>control
>of who ever initates this and must know of the status of these procedures.
>That is it needs to instruct the MG to intitate AAA/L2TP/etc. and
>be notified of any failure or success of these procedures. The MGC also
>needs to
>be notified during start-up as well on kind of AAA interface the MG
>supports (RADIUS, etc).

As I've said many times, where is this need? Can you quantify it or
describe in real terms what would break if you didn't have this
capability? ISP's using MEGACO precursors don't have this requirement
today.

>I also do not understand your concern about impact on the 50,000,000 users
>and the 1000s of ISPs who are presently doing this procedure if we change
>MEGACO AAA function the way we are describing it.
>Nobody is changing AAA , PPP, or L2TP procedures that will impact users or
>ISPs.
>So what are you talking about.?

Redirecting AAA information through an intelligent entity will
certainly impact current procedures. Removing the state and control
from the NAS will impact even more.

>If the ISP wants to buy a new NAS which supports MEGACO, they are already
>changing their NAS, so what is so hard about a different AAA provisioning
>site,
>instead of at the NAS, now they will do all the AAA/L2TP provisioning in the
>MGC.

This is where I recommend that you learn more about the NAS architecture.
Changing the call setup signalling is entirely different than changing
AAA. And I keep hearing about L2TP which is a very small piece of the pie.
There is so much more that hasn't been addressed.

>Also, think of what happens when one MGC controls several MGs (may be upto 10
>large MGs (50K - 500K ports). Think of the addess provisioning that one has to
>do in all MGs. If I (the network administrator) want to add one ISP I have to
>provision many MGs instead of one MGC.
>Also, what if the MG losses its RADIUS interface, should the MGC just accept
>calls anyway. If it knew of the problem it could have rerouted the incoming
>SS7 calls to other MGs (SS7 now has a new feature where a call can be sent
>on an alternate route defined  in the SS7 RELEASE Message).

ISP's today have solved all of the concerns that you list above. Radius
gives you central control. Radius has backup and failover scenarios covered.

I apologize if my emails sound harsh. Perhaps I can explain my views
in person in Washington.

---

From: Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 08:47:41 -0700

>You want to know the needs:

That's fine in and of itself, but not at the very costly expense of
changing existing NAS operations. You should take your requirements to
the NASREQ working group.

>2. Simpler AAA data provisoning procedures if its done in MGC once for

This doesn't make sense. AAA is done once in an AAA server for all the
NAS's it supports. If you want tight coupling, implement your AAA
server on the same platform as your MGC. But you don't need to
burden MEGACO. You can continue to use AAA protocols over the same
IP interface.

>the incoming call if it know of the MG's AAA interface failure.

See above. If timing is critical, co-locate.

>4. Automatic Call Control can be initiated by MGC if #2 occures.

Current operations automate call control already. What is the real
issue?