Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC

Santhana <santhana@huawei.com> Mon, 18 April 2011 13:25 UTC

Return-Path: <santhana@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DF4E070F for <sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.445, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_45=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ls3BeSFTP8Me for <sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07715E0664 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU005D8NVZCY@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU008EINVZ84@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST)
Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJU00EZONVYUC@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:37:48 +0530
From: Santhana <santhana@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <JBECLENKLBCKAAKFGAJOMEJOHMAA.barryn@adax.com>
To: 'Barry Nagelberg' <barryn@adax.com>, 'SIGTRAN Mailing List' <sigtran@ietf.org>
Message-id: <2B5B5A08294D444BAD72ADDDB9471223@china.huawei.com>
Organization: Htipl
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: Acv9yeCuSAm+zNY+S4SQQj7fqLG76gAAReUg
References: <D02F09AE6384491DA74FFA5E85D6766F@china.huawei.com> <JBECLENKLBCKAAKFGAJOMEJOHMAA.barryn@adax.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com
List-Id: Signaling Transport <sigtran.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sigtran>, <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sigtran>
List-Post: <mailto:sigtran@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran>, <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:25:31 -0000

Hi Barry
	Thanks for ur reply. I should have been more specific in my first
mail. In the RC mandatory case(where multiple RKs and RCs are coordinated),
in DAUD message which RC should be sent 1) or 2) below. 

1) list of RCs corresponding(to identify the traffic flow of) to the
Destinations being Audited
2) RC of the Destination that is sending the DAUD message

Regards
+Santhana


-----Original Message-----
From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Barry Nagelberg
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 6:39 PM
To: SIGTRAN Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC

Santhana,

It depends.

This is why the Routing Context parameter is classified as "Conditional" for
all of the Signalling Network Management
(SSNM) Messages. There are several cases, the first two of which are
enumerated in the description of the Routing
Context parameter, at the top of page 38 of the RFC:

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

B. 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, ...

There is a third case, which is related to case A:
C. Where exactly one Routing Key has been configured for a given
association, sending of Routing Context is not required
on that association.

Case C is documented in Section 4.3.4.3. "ASP Active Procedures":
<snip>
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.
<snip>

Barry Nagelberg
Adax, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Santhana
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:19 AM
To: sigtran@ietf.org
Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC


Hi all
            The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg.
Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP
about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of
the Destinations which it is Auditing ?

Regards
+Santhana

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran