Re: [Sigtran] Sigtran interworking issue between multivendor node

gitam changkakoti <gitam.changkakoti@live.in> Tue, 26 July 2016 09:05 UTC

Return-Path: <gitam.changkakoti@live.in>
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 380EB12D0CF for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 02:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 uwyqwRS67por for <sigtran@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 02:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from COL004-OMC3S12.hotmail.com (col004-omc3s12.hotmail.com [65.55.34.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA044127058 for <sigtran@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 02:05:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-SG2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.34.135]) by COL004-OMC3S12.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Tue, 26 Jul 2016 02:05:04 -0700
Received: from HK2APC01FT048.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.56) by HK2APC01HT120.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.127) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.539.16; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:05:02 +0000
Received: from PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.152.248.60) by HK2APC01FT048.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.200) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.549.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:05:01 +0000
Received: from PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.51.24]) by PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.51.24]) with mapi id 15.01.0544.019; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:05:00 +0000
From: gitam changkakoti <gitam.changkakoti@live.in>
To: Pradeep4 Kumar <pradeep4.kumar@aricent.com>
Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] Sigtran interworking issue between multivendor node
Thread-Index: AQHR5lkuswNAJb2G+ke8mLGKVuGbs6ApXqqggADHMwCAAEcAfA==
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:04:59 +0000
Message-ID: <PS1PR0301MB2122DB3CD64F63C16174F533ED0E0@PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <PS1PR0301MB212239D13AA549F53900907BED0D0@PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com> <SG2PR0301MB2127866D25F2B3D92AA1CF35ED0D0@SG2PR0301MB2127.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <PS1PR04MB172222E2068B38CFD9626102DE0E0@PS1PR04MB1722.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <PS1PR04MB172222E2068B38CFD9626102DE0E0@PS1PR04MB1722.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 10.152.248.60) smtp.mailfrom=live.in; aricent.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;aricent.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=live.in;
received-spf: SoftFail (protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning live.in discourages use of 10.152.248.60 as permitted sender)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [D8HsZL39BbAqGmNd/iwlZ3NTbqpBkLmu]
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:10.152.248.60; IPV:NLI; CTRY:; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98900003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:HK2APC01HT120; H:PS1PR0301MB2122.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; HK2APC01HT120; 6:rg5YQugHa1vM3I83LgugiHK19OZbDs2n3ZiFHc89tXPmnk3rCJeO/WzUcEEQeBLXw56FBsTeRFD8lEnlRcxwIhX6j4Djl/BIAJywfvRWwvn6lvfba0EbGUOeC0GOEQ4gL4+7AcU9fWQwXPUnC9ntuyNPQRa5nihqxqb44cXt+ogEc6duODHWnklQp7iW+zKZWixbESalMZvr9Vdt42P+MoFzON2qCzDZoBO0HPZG/3sG7HsHUbUOQPvU+yWWGKmQpL71cvh4EhGLfdd8WILAxTIqbvE3/QRT5Hzs1rP0qhfKS0iFBiq/XI7Xrxy8OH8T; 5:2iXFdwNiF1eUUL2L3lWgx0WLfTszUtWNH9zYnsMVqh4No9l+jnNoQnxgrLal30quHucT50rQXnf6LP3OCM/5cSkZW1kZqXnCxGnFE9FNOOAA1P9Qu/rY1lFhMpVgD3Ziuby7qXfkZmlFqYFaEzeuww==; 24:Cy8HBMaF1jc3tmZ/UmF37Xp8dH5YVE8r/Y6RUjQcCQnmaxoS1dt7rSH5+aAkRl7nPUVzyPwI9hRsL5hgXGUcpSaIGndGxUnXHtdABRq0PF0=; 7:oC4CTmvYoJv05KVtIH4tlB1P8cql3n+I5PbD4DFzoexL8SZnFYjiCXDxMpRw7OK4eyYj9SCt3MAbtCbM7xpBsBcLhi9PQ6cAx13ohg5rw2/1t7AmRwuCYO7nVMEqeAOwk7XD6Oh0ik+W2llQrx6VZ2kaxSgOUBdvF62oJPlTebNyVPiUKbT9BBlOAtBWr8w4VoE5am09y7y4TijMQpyl6hRTMj8e5pjBkIEoFpJdR2fBpzGiLOXXqVfyh5IvSJQV
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5360db3f-9478-40bd-045b-08d3b533ec3a
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(1601124038)(1601125047); SRVR:HK2APC01HT120;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(432015012)(82015046); SRVR:HK2APC01HT120; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:HK2APC01HT120;
x-forefront-prvs: 00159D1518
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jul 2016 09:04:59.9005 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2APC01HT120
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jul 2016 09:05:04.0457 (UTC) FILETIME=[CC629B90:01D1E71C]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sigtran/tsgEuiXNAG6ws0v5_nlHrQuCr7I>
Cc: "sigtran@ietf.org" <sigtran@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Sigtran interworking issue between multivendor node
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:05:06 -0000

Thanks Pradeep for the support. The below changes were made and issue resolved.
1. BSC configured in IPSP mode.
2. Routing context advertisements stopped at MGw end. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26-Jul-2016, at 10:21, Pradeep4 Kumar <pradeep4.kumar@aricent.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Gitam,
> 
> I am assuming that the open MGW and AOIP BSC are connection over the IPSP communication type. Correct if I am wrong?
> 
> IPSP is point to point communication so DAUD is not expected message on IPSP communication mode.
> 
> So the receiving end point must drop the DAUD message and also this end point can optionally send back Management Error  message with error as "Unexpected Message".
> 
> Same can be inferred from section "3.8.1" from rfc4666 as below:
> 
> Off course the more experienced experts can comment and put more light on this topic and correct me if needed.
> 
> 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The "Unexpected Message" error MAY be sent if a defined and
>   recognized message is received that is not expected in the current
>   state (in some cases, the ASP may optionally silently discard the
>   message and not send an Error message).
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> Best Regards,
> Pradeep Kumar
> "The world needs HQ (Humanity quotient) more than IQ."
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gitam changkakoti [mailto:gitam.changkakoti@live.in]
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 10:28 PM
> To: sigtran@ietf.org
> Subject: [Sigtran] Sigtran interworking issue between multivendor node
> 
> 
>> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> Greetings .... This mail is intended to seek suggestion on Sigtran connectivity between multivendor node.
>> 
>> We are trying to connect open MGW to an AOIP BSC. Both belongs to different vendors. Fluctuation of M3Ua SUA observed at BSC end post   Connectivity.
>> 
>> As per MGW vendor BSC is not supposed to send SUA management messages to MGW( DAUD) which is causing MGW to send DUNA to BSC inturn causing fluctuations @ BSc end for mgw cluster SPC.
>> 
>> Please be informed, there is no fluctuation @ association level. Kindly suggest and share the actual guidelines . What should happen as per Rfc.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Gitam
>> +919706818836
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."