Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding M3UA SCON message
mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> Tue, 08 February 2011 09:12 UTC
Return-Path: <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sigtran@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sigtran@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F3A3A6DDB for <sigtran@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 01:12:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PFDuU7moG8ft for <sigtran@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 01:12:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA323A6CDA for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 01:12:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iym1 with SMTP id 1so5467847iym.31 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 01:12:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=VxifnAbFe3cAln3eEY5V01tx9EcTeSeIRFFGEu3+Ebk=; b=ECKz34OlLk10ZEBzXSqxZwCeVvUceE/mWGcZHF99VwAydizZc1/njV0p0HzmqJGh2U hgWz4kIwuhaVn2ygLapNu++04MFKHSv4gzhTF3zRHYNAsl3UXHFaah2BELLiek1CsZ/w 9Iw711epfsPH1W5MxvTBTGBpE8t+vPucUSE3s=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=fdFRTHjLn0Uzwz+YDJ8bJq2BvgQSeCmY3IHrEv6EHL24y8QzhcN2CrBUeUynt8fHvq I0wULMX2DJcUwVGCjwSyhvHl4SHe8QNx3rkDBRrJPxM2/dKOTYpI31gZ4w2JFdlutEiC fNGKynxq5xZpny74NyfxfI3y5YPpDfncInGPA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.37.197 with SMTP id y5mr18532476ibd.180.1297156328324; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 01:12:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.206.209 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 01:12:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <9870BEE781B2694BA446B8FD65882E850D5A6BB8FE@ESESSCMS0363.eemea.ericsson.se>
References: <AANLkTimYZK80+uf0ANo7G3HigO=E1Kv9Ua2YXNP5q09r@mail.gmail.com> <9870BEE781B2694BA446B8FD65882E850D5A6BB8FE@ESESSCMS0363.eemea.ericsson.se>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:12:08 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTimpxcUWYUN5pxM1OcwJNWnxeV9y-E7+XARi7ivy@mail.gmail.com>
From: mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com>
To: Zoltán Juhász <zoltan.juhasz@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0022150490cb2b06b4049bc1bea8"
Cc: "sigtran@ietf.org" <sigtran@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding M3UA SCON message
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Signaling Transport <sigtran.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 09:12:03 -0000
Hi Zoltán, Could you please provide a little network capture. -- BR Abdelkader Mosbah. On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Zoltán Juhász <zoltan.juhasz@ericsson.com>wrote: > Hi Mosbah, > > Thank you for your post. > Yes, the network outage was serious because of direct association between > ASP1 and ASP2. But ASP1 sent SCON to SG1 and SG2 as well. The network would > have been suffered from traffic stoppage if this direct assoc. not existed. > > ASP1 uses SG1 and SG2 in loadsharing mode. > I don't know if ASP1 has backup ASP (it is another vendor's equipment) > > > Regards > Zoltan > > ------------------------------ > *From:* mosbah abdelkader [mailto:mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:20 PM > *To:* Zoltán Juhász > *Cc:* sigtran@ietf.org; plotkin@pisem.net > *Subject:* Re: Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding M3UA SCON message > > Hi all, > > > This is my first message here. I am involved in some SIGTRAN projects and > would like to interact with people here to give and take help. > > > I agree with Plotkin in that ASP1 cannot report SCON of SG1 and SG2. > > > I think your issue is caused by the association between ASP1 and ASP2 that > I don't not understand why it is present. > > > Hope that helps. > > > Have a little question here: How M3UA traffic is distributed between the 2 > SGs? are you using loadsharing architecture or simply using 1 SG for traffic > and the other for Fault tolerancing? What about HA: do you have some backup > ASP in AS side, How many? > > > Thank you. > > > -- > Best regards > > Abdelkader Mosbah. >
- [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding M3U… Zoltán Juhász
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Mikhail Plotkin
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… mosbah abdelkader
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Zoltán Juhász
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… mosbah abdelkader
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Zoltán Juhász
- Re: [Sigtran] Interpretation of RFC4666 regarding… Brian F. G. Bidulock