Subject: [Sigtran] M3UA, Routing Context parameter in SSNM

From: 김 무형 <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:17:46 +0900

Hi,

I am doing inter-working test between our ASP stack and other SGP stack.
but, I have found a ambiguous meaning when I test SSNM function.
We receive a SCON that does not include the Routing Context parameter.
but, there is single Routing Key and Routing Context between ASP and  
SGP.

In RFC 3332,
    Routing Context: n x 32-bits (unsigned integer)

       The optional Routing Context parameter contains the Routing
       Context values associated with the DUNA message.  Where a Routing
       Key has not been coordinated between the SGP and ASP, sending of
       Routing Context is not required.  Where multiple Routing Keys and
       Routing Contexts are used across a common association, the  
Routing
       Context(s) MUST be sent to identify the concerned traffic flows
       for which the DUNA message applies, assisting in outgoing traffic
       management and internal distribution of MTP-PAUSE indications to
       MTP3-Users at the receiver.

if there is single Routing Key and Routing Context between the SGP  
and ASP as our configuration,
is the Routing Context parameter in SSNM message optional? or mandatory?

Regards!

* NOTICE:
    Change the Text Encoding to UTF-8 if you can't read the text in  
this mail.

Moo-hyoung Kim
Core Technology / Network BIZ. Division
UANGEL Corporation
Tel   : +82-31-710-6240
Mobile: +82-11-9052-1122
E-mail: [email-masked]

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

---

From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 21:15:09 -0600

±è,

±è ¹«Çü wrote:                                (Mon, 03 Jul 2006 11:17:46)
>        Routing Contexts are used across a common association, the  Routing

Optional: because there are not "multiple Routing Keys and Routing Contexts
used accross a common association" and, therefore, the MUST does not apply.

As there is only one routing context for the entire association, the
implementation should not have a problem discerning that.  OTOH, an
implementation could choose to send one anyway (if one was even assigned).

--brian

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

---

From: 김 무형 <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 13:41:59 +0900

Hi, brian

Thanks for your reply.
I have other question about this problem.

We use the RKM function between ASP and SGP.
And, We send a Routing Key to SGP and We receive a Routing Context  
value from SGP.
So, I think the Routing Context in SSNM message is required
because Routing Key has been coordinated between SGP and ASP.
is it right?

RFP 3332,
"Where a Routing Key has not been coordinated between the SGP and ASP,
sending of Routing Context is not required. "

Regards!
-- Kim

* NOTICE:

Moo-hyoung Kim

---

From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 22:57:36 -0600

±è,

±è ¹«Çü wrote:                              (Mon, 03 Jul 2006 13:41:59)
> sending of Routing Context is not required. "

No, this says when it is not required, not when it is.  Is is only required
when there are multiple RC values and the lack of one would be ambigious.

As I said before, however, as an RC value was assigned, both side might as
well send it (after all, another RK could be registered in the future), but,
from the text, it is clearly _not_ required.

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