[Sigtran] Regarding INAP parameter Tags
prabath weerasinghe <psaw.mora@gmail.com> Wed, 24 May 2017 05:43 UTC
Return-Path: <psaw.mora@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD7A612778D for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YQXWJUL-DvOO for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x233.google.com (mail-oi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3A07126C26 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x233.google.com with SMTP id l18so228507148oig.2 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=dVG7DN68lWDj/K2Lkdtb1p26LDmIg7rxwlya8HGrHwo=; b=ImuVgXkLTk5BYkbCNxsY0nsFHgrkvcUqmOST2wXgCMNz57n6B3t6RUkV+48Lnln1Fe LFxN0dpgPc+zxNoe+ogXh8sLE0BbzWzG3CnFhsWVQVnEaIq4Pt1/dZ7Rh9aUQ/tHUzI6 dgIHtzba5QZOgwLyhmkqhdJi0Zv4t/dcj3SBSLP3fN27av34adGDhby2jwMfBZTYJ3LQ mhJNEp56BeIiGwKXae/y7B/X2tIoJd6XD6gngthu/ann2C+RuruPKYWLHBRd77wStDuV OjqQfOkbJjHxHZTBbk5ADqH5+JMd9S2eShNui6OyAKF9WIeydUndA6lwlE/f02bI2xq2 lNzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=dVG7DN68lWDj/K2Lkdtb1p26LDmIg7rxwlya8HGrHwo=; b=dDFJlLUV1rsMpqLSQr8cvYv/iw8mR5pMJl+njVToJI207Cyw1K3/8j9q/KjP/b1S3o uzFM6ncj0JgaLtqoNbdvALrnbgBu6lCoX+b3JKnuam5TpkKNFgKolxoAM3Vx3/SleYWe o1nd1r8RueXAf4Hyv1+9UTORLRUAqjdb9JloOotJ9RJZix39NJw2oIzhHohE4lJaeMPY c2nOew8JtUaJabyJArvoXHO6m6c1z7ksJeTnjH900XN57fBQnj0rWr19MK1Q+coXgwr8 vzO55k9n0P5rRAnSezNINSFfVFMSH/4oCOKiZ3Ns+VHbX9/5ygaFGbqvHfeGNpH2OKTV sPtA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDni6xk89qPt86jYvKmj3l2U+hTC6Qvx91qB0EFrAie1o1YW+hj +9HzSjvNoBVHTYNx1Dfj97cJcHMHaflF
X-Received: by 10.157.41.198 with SMTP id g6mr3633282otd.34.1495604608094; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.32.51 with HTTP; Tue, 23 May 2017 22:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: prabath weerasinghe <psaw.mora@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 11:13:27 +0530
Message-ID: <CADgPooopAcPNdUCMHpNiCiJkHRFugvQ9nX9DjLFOa2sSf1NFFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: sigtran@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113d19a463d75205503e950b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sigtran/5u1XH1KRqpcqogoKBtL9MmD4Pkk>
Subject: [Sigtran] Regarding INAP parameter Tags
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 24 May 2017 05:43:31 -0000
Hi All, This is regarding INAP PDU encoding and decoding. I'm working on an INAP protocol implementation and was referring ASN.1 specification. Here follows an excerpt from the spec for InitialDP. InitialDPArg ::= SEQUENCE { *serviceKey [0] *ServiceKey, *calledPartyNumber [2] *CalledPartyNumber OPTIONAL, callingPartyNumber [3] CallingPartyNumber OPTIONAL, callingPartysCategory [5] CallingPartysCategory OPTIONAL, cGEncountered [7] CGEncountered OPTIONAL, iPSSPCapabilities [8] IPSSPCapabilities OPTIONAL, As per the specification, serviceKey has the tag value of 0 and calledPartyNumber has a tag value of 2 an so on. When I checked a sample INAP pcap INAP-Sample-PCAP <https://www.cloudshark.org/captures/028324459536?filter=inap> , it was showing the tag values for serviceKey and calledPartyNumber as 80 and 82 in Hex. Could anyone please explain the reason for the difference ? Is there any special way of encoding the tag value ? Thanks and Regards, -- Prabath Weerasinghe _________________________________________________________________________________ Confidentiality and Disclaimer This email and any attachments are intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, disclose, distribute or copy this email or use the information therein or act or omit to act in reliance thereof. Please also inform the sender of erroneous receipt and delete the material from your system.
- [Sigtran] Regarding INAP parameter Tags prabath weerasinghe