Subject: RE: [SUA issue 17 & M3UA issue #11] IPSP cases.

From: "Alf Heidermark (UAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:14:45 +0200

Brian
Can you point where it is explicit in MTP that you provide redundancy between host in MTP . You can use the functions in MTP to do it and twist little with your implemntation,. you can do the same thing with SCTP. SCTP does not disallow to do what I propose.

In my undesrstanding the performance requirement on MTP is a value when you can utilise all MTP functions. SCTP do the same values, without any extra in M3UA. These type of extra thing you want can be moved to a new RFC thaar supports the redundancy handling for multiple associations.

Alf 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: den 6 september 2001 14:05
To: sigtran
Subject: Re: [SUA issue 17 & M3UA issue #11] IPSP cases.
Importance: High

Alf,

Alf can you point to which part of RFC 2960 provides redundancy between hosts?

--brian

On Thu, 06 Sep 2001, Alf Heidermark (UAB) wrote:

> Brian
>
> You can do the same by putting your "SCTP signaling links ending up on
> different host" in the same association. You do not need muliple association
> to do at, even if you can use it.
> 
> Alf
> 
>     
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: den 6 september 2001 13:32
> To: sigtran
> Subject: Re: [SUA issue 17 & M3UA issue #11] IPSP cases.
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> Alf,
> 
> Changeover and changeback also occur between linksets of a combined linkset
> and even between combined linksets.  There is no restriction in SS7 to
> connecting all linksets at a signalling point to one "host", as there is
> with an SCTP association.  Each link in a linkset can be attached to a
> different "host" and in many implementations this is the case.  MTP handles
> changeover between multiple "hosts" in that it handles changeover between
> multiple processors each handling one or several links of a linkset.  SCTP
> does not support this.  SCTP has problems supporting M2PA.
> 
> --brian
> 
> On Thu, 06 Sep 2001, Alf Heidermark (UAB) wrote:
> 
> > Brian 
> > 
> > With the change over change back procedure you just have another routing of
> > the message to the same host (point code), you do not change host (point
> > code). These type of requiremnents is already covered by SCTP as Javier very
> > well pointed out.
> > 
> > Alf
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: den 6 september 2001 13:14
> > To: sigtran
> > Cc: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [SUA issue 17 & M3UA issue #11] IPSP cases.
> > Importance: High
> > 
> > 
> > Alf,
> > 
> > Changeover and Changeback procedures.  See Q.704 Clause 5 and 6.
> > Take special note of "Processor Outage" procedures.
> > 
> > --brian
> > 
> > On Thu, 06 Sep 2001, Alf Heidermark (UAB) wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Brian can you point to which part of MTP that provides redudancy between hosts.
> > > 
> > 

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email-masked]
http://www.openss7.org/

---
You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]

---
You are currently subscribed to sigtran as: [email-masked]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]