IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sigtran] Conceptual doubt between an ASP and SGP

Ajay Garg <ajaygargnsit@gmail.com> Thu, 13 March 2014 10:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ajaygargnsit@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52761A09AD for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 J2ZZd2ycS5OS for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x233.google.com (mail-pb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B85B1A09A4 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id uo5so881917pbc.38 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=t/5PvZMcduLnFCuKsL8jTCWqyjIChxOsoH0d2aWbjcA=; b=s7EPTrEx8QqVghyswlXOVGokz+EYuEzzRN95zmeikYErznO1RukN6nasN1F+wRQPiV x5r94MyRyOeklEiA+YiYm5u+4Zbmn+EkX/wLNnaPSxCvb0gP2UgLwEJWth1paOY8tbPc yfv1MMTZZdhTPu2bwF3O+5leyhAu0mU+o45bbvoJ4TZ22d7O8CJLUvxNG6WdzMPsB03p fQqgTu+h4ZKE8Mq8eLTCswoaGZ48ApA8L3k7Tv1uJsZZgmjc5f8BNBQsvPdn2IwI9QKb 9uCXIyzjLeb2wv6fLZr7fTureWP2OKzF1ygKHvkbG6BIQWli2jQ4F7IdK5WbjEuDtZOM 44RA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.226.145 with SMTP id rs17mr1209575pac.144.1394705078222; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.92.9 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140313071729.GB15132@openss7.org>
References: <CAHP4M8VFfMjLXGQ703yL+Ne7Dujf7GmxOjJY+Ndvzn9k5K553Q@mail.gmail.com> <20140313071729.GB15132@openss7.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:34:38 +0530
Message-ID: <CAHP4M8VbbdprFv-AAfuu43fpwp3fskk4CZ6v2Xfaw_g2=MdfeQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ajay Garg <ajaygargnsit@gmail.com>
To: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f3b552ec104e804f47a1469
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sigtran/NOHmZY31ww1xjX4aDPWghnkfcwE
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Conceptual doubt between an ASP and SGP
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 10:04:48 -0000

Brian,

RFC-2719 seems to be too technical for the use-case we are trying to
understand :)
I would rather present (a simplified version of) our use-case.

*
We have 3 nodes - N1, N2, N3.

*
We need to transfer messages in-between N1 and N3.

*
There is an IPSP-IPSP association each between between N1 <-> N2, and N2
<-> N3 (but no IPSP-IPSP association between N1 <-> N3).

*
Also, provisions for GTT are available at each of N1, N2 and N3.



Theoritically/Practically, would the above configuration work? Or is it
necessary to have a SGP configured at N2?


Looking forward to clarifications.


Thanks and Regards,
Ajay



On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org
> wrote:

> Ajay,
>
> Please see comments below...
>
> Ajay Garg wrote:                              (Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:48:19)
> >    Hi all.
> >    I am an absolute newbie in telecom domain, so kindly forgive me if I
> >    sound incredibly stupid.
> >    From what I understand, an ASP is a process running on an AS, and a
> SGP
> >    is a process running on a SG.
>
> Not quite.  See RFC 4666 "1.2 Terminology" for a definition of ASP,
> AS, SGP and SG.
>
> >    Each ASP <-> SGP link is a SCTP connection.
> >    Also, I understand that SGP is responsible for message-routing, while
> >    an ASP is merely an end-point for a SCTP connection.
> >    Given that, are there any extra differences between a ASP and SGP (in
> >    addition to the routing-capabilities of a SGP)?
> >    I will be grateful for any pointers/clarifications.
>
> RFC 4666 describes for 124 pages the differences between ASP and SGP.
>
> BTW, it is not an SGP per se that has routing capabilities, but an
> SG, where the SG is made up of some SGP, an SS7 stack and a
> interworking function.
>
> See also RFC 2719 "Framework Architecture for Signaling Transport"
> for a better overview of what's going on.
>
> --brian
>
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> bidulock@openss7.org
> http://www.openss7.org/
>



-- 
Regards,
Ajay

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email