Subject: R2 package - last call

From: Kushanava Laha <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 12:00:59 +0530

Hi Matt,
     The "Failure" message in the packages is an event and not a signal.
No one prevents from sending a solicited Failure to MGC from MG in case
of R1 or R2 state machine malfunction at MG. It is upto the MGC to decide
then what is to be done on occurence of such an event. MGC may wish to
release the call. The drafts DO NOT talk of a failure as a signal from MGC
to MG as a result of state machine malfunction or any other error condition
at MGC as MG is NOT the entitiy to decide and act on MGC signaling procedure
failures.

     Regarding the issue of bounding, even the digitmap completion event
in section E.6 of the Megaco protocol document defines a "dialstring" as
"a string of digit map symbols (possibly empty) returned as a quoted string"
and assumes the bound imposed by the protocol on the number of characters
in a "string". I admit that bounding is required for performance reasons and
it is there, implicitly.

regards,
Kushanava Laha

Matt wrote:

>Another case is Protocol State Machine malfunction in the Failure message.
>What
>happens when an MGC wishes to convey that information to a switch or vice
>versa?
>
> >>[kL] I doubt whether either the R1 and R2 protocol gives the provision to
>indicate
>protocol state machine failures from one end-point to the other either through
>line or address signaling. Hence what is MG supposed to do with the "State
>Machine
>Failure" message, if at all incorporated in the packages?

I don't understand. If it is not used, then why is it in your draft?

>Could it be a problem to have open-ended strings in these messages?
>Shouldn't we set some bounds? Also, could native descriptors be used
>instead to give some bounding?
>
> >>[kL]I fail to understand the scope of open-ended strings in the packages.
>If the mode through which digits are reported to MGC, is what is being
>referred
>to
>the packages do talk about a string. The bound field is not needed as Megaco
>does impose an upper restriction on the number of characters in a string.

For performance reasons bounding is a good idea in general.