RE: [Sip] Strict, Semi-Strict and Loose mode in RPH - not a good fit for ets and wps

[Janet P Gunn <[e-mail]>]

James said:
___

> > 5 Precedence (queueing) is generally the means of providing priority,
but
> > exemption from network management controls, for instance call admission
> > within an IP domain, when a "regular" call would not be admitted, is
also
> > needed.  Pre-emption is not used.  (semi-strict "plus more")

I do not understand what you have written above, can you rephrase please?
___

OK. I'll try again (and I combined two different cases, which didn't help
the clarity).

Section 7 says
      "The ets and wps namespaces operate with preferential treatment but
   without preemption.  These namespaces operate under a policy of
   provide preferential treatment to higher relative priority requests
   instead of processing lower relative priority requests.  Messages
   are not preempted, or deleted, except under extreme loads in which
   all available processing is taken up with higher priority messages.

   An example of this is at a IP/PSTN gateway with all of the PSTN side
   circuits utilized.  In strict mode one of the lower priority
   circuits would be freed using preemption.  In semi-strict mode, the
   SIP request May be granted access to the next available circuit
   based on this header's presence in the authorized message,
   regardless of how many other "regular" requests are received at that
   gateway."

First, is that "May" supposed to be "MAY" or "may"?

But more significantly, the desired behavior at the PSTN gateway is more
complicated than what you describe;

-At an IP/PSTN gateway with all of the PSTN side circuits utilized, not
only would the request with the appropriate RPH be granted "the next
available circuit" but if several requests with the appropriate RPH arrive,
they would be queued for the next several circuits to become available.

- At an IP/PSTN gateway, "restrictive network management controls" may be
active, even if  not all PSTN side circuits are utilized.  (An example of
a "restrictive network management control" is "call gapping" in which only
one call every x seconds is accepted.  "Call gapping" is usually made
active as a response to overall network congestion, a bit like ECN in an IP
network).  If restrictive network management controls are active, a request
with the appropriate RPH would be granted an available circuit, even if
less than x seconds had passed since the last call was admitted.

- At an IP/PSTN gateway, if the request has the appropriate RPH, certain
parameters (CPC and/or Precedence) would be set in the ISUP IAM.

I don't see anything in the RPH ID that prevents this "additional"
functionality, so this comment doesn't necessarily mean anything needs to
change.  It was just that the current text is a little misleading in that
it seems to imply that "access to the next available circuit" is all that
is intended.

Janet

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please
delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in
delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to
bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written
agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail
for such purpose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
Use [e-mail] for new developments on the application of sip