RE: [Sigtran] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sigtran-sua-15.txt

Brian,

You're right. AspId is no use in SGP/ASP exchange.

I'm just getting confused, because SUA draft says in terminology chapter:

   IP Server Process (IPSP) - A process instance of an IP-based 
   application.  An IPSP is essentially the same as an ASP, except that 
   it uses SUA in a peer-to-peer fashion.

It never says that IPSP could play the role of an SGP while being an ASP..
May be it would be nice to add such a note about this..

Christophe.

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:bidulock@openss7.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:09 PM
To: Anzile, Christophe
Cc: john.loughney@nokia.com; sigtran@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sigtran-sua-15.txt

Christophe,

IPSP SE is an ASP/SGP relationship and only the ASP side need send
ASP Id.

IPSP DE both send ASPAC and the ASP Id is not needed in ASPUP Ack.

So how would the IPSP use this?

You say to include it in some messages below, but not what the
receiver of the ASPUP Ack is expected (or able) to do with the value.

What would the SE IPSP receiving the ASPUp Ack (remember, acting in ASP
mode) do with it?  There are no procedures defined for an ASP to use
an "SGP Id" if you will...

So, I'm an SE IPSP acting in ASP mode.  I send you an ASPUP and you
send me an ASPUP Ack with an ASP Id in it.  What am I to do with it?
I never send Notify (you do), so what do I do with it?  What use is it?

--brian

Anzile, Christophe wrote:                                                          (Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:35:08)
> My proposal would be :
> 
> The optional ASP Identifier parameter is specifically useful for IPSP 
> communication. In that case the IPSP answering the ASP Up message MAY 
> include its own ASP Identifier value, so that it can give back its ASP
> Identifier to the demanding IPSP in case of a single UP/UP-Ack exchange.
> For standard AS-SG communication, this parameter MUST NOT be used. 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:bidulock@openss7.org]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 3:45 PM
> To: john.loughney@nokia.com
> Cc: Anzile, Christophe; sigtran@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sigtran-sua-15.txt
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> We discussed this before an nobody had a real problem with it.
> 
> However, more than just adding the optional parameter to the
> ASP Up Ack, it also needs to be described how one should use it.
> Althoug a lot of uses were discussed, nobody put together a
> coherent proposal for its use.
> 
> Does someone have a simple proposal for it use?
> 
> --brian
> 
> John Loughney wrote:                                                                  (Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:33:51)
> > Hi,
> > 
> > That could be reasonable - anyone have problems with this?
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ext Anzile, Christophe [mailto:christophe.anzile@hp.com]
> > > Sent: 10 July, 2003 12:26
> > > To: Loughney John (NRC/Helsinki)
> > > Cc: sigtran@ietf.org
> > > Subject: RE: [Sigtran] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sigtran-sua-15.txt
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi John,
> > > 
> > > section 3.5.2 : 
> > > it would be judicious to add an optional ASP-ID parameter in 
> > > the UP-ACK message,
> > > especially for IPSP communication (think of single exchange).
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Christophe.
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sigtran mailing list
> > Sigtran@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
> 
> -- 
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> bidulock@openss7.org
> http://www.openss7.org/

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock@openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran