From santhana@huawei.com Mon Apr 4 23:41:49 2011 Return-Path: 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 90FAD3A68CE for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 23:41:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.995 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.995 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1] 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 UCw8IXP-uVwp for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 23:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D643A68CC for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 23:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ6007662N14F@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:42:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ600HZQ2N17D@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:42:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml06-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJ600JPK2N0TY@szxml06-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:42:37 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 11:56:35 +0530 From: Santhana To: sigtran@ietf.org Message-id: <4691873B40F2477AAAC33D88DF7D99F5@china.huawei.com> Organization: Htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_8UCjd2YKfdaas5UoqD052A)" Thread-index: AcvzWmkGpLBJin1PQmu//0/f7BDdUw== Subject: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 06:41:49 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_8UCjd2YKfdaas5UoqD052A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query clarified. My Query: Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ? In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in this case. In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification. Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged? But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ? Pls help me understand this point. Thanks & Regards Santhanakrishnan --Boundary_(ID_8UCjd2YKfdaas5UoqD052A) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi

      I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query clarified.

 

My Query:

      Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ?

 

      In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in this case.

      In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification.

     

      Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged?

 

      But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ?

 

      Pls help me understand this point.

 

Thanks & Regards

Santhanakrishnan

--Boundary_(ID_8UCjd2YKfdaas5UoqD052A)-- From arif15jan@gmail.com Tue Apr 5 07:26:14 2011 Return-Path: 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 CA25228C14A for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:26:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.666 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 1Dwz7xDVVdOe for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:26:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E1128C111 for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so389291vxg.31 for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:27:57 -0700 (PDT) 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=Bo5yDWP5cIDkB22TpyVE31lCKrOpTckbmXsxvZoYDRs=; b=bmnsCZ1FX0eEWQUBecJ8HCaC3xPI5j5ds1gIU6Wt8Tsj4oYxITtgcg6BD6DQN2DEI+ zcsDnQQ5ZUQwHyYBrtyl811ZJwhRVR1jok97aJ9Ht+Hh6ldHFcmAqlD9x4Gx7lD7uL6B CZvSfnqbbn/8SiORXex5Nphnb/+Xwnl/LkzQo= 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=kZw6GN/aDcN/otyuCcKc08WldGKg01+VOaxDXRCKntoOUyqgDFzw5lc5G3MXVGBwS7 zLdiRr1238Wj4t1D1qV+IDj3sp78jJHh3MS/Ru1jZc/M24TWQ2yZ919QyAjr/ajXbUUA jzDknuo0cpjbr2yPAoJvnCzTwIoZnl0mz82M8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.0.171 with SMTP id 11mr1719450vdf.201.1302013677003; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:27:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.99.202 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:27:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4691873B40F2477AAAC33D88DF7D99F5@china.huawei.com> References: <4691873B40F2477AAAC33D88DF7D99F5@china.huawei.com> Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:27:56 +0100 Message-ID: From: arif khan To: santhana@huawei.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:26:14 -0000 Yes ....It is possible with broadband support at the SCCP and MTP3 Level for HSL Regards -arif On 4/5/11, Santhana wrote: > Hi > > I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If > I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query > clarified. > > > > My Query: > > Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ? > > > > In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M > links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is > also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in > this case. > > In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification. > > > > Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged? > > > > But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But > above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this > XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN > parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ? > > > > Pls help me understand this point. > > > > Thanks & Regards > > Santhanakrishnan > > From santhana@huawei.com Tue Apr 5 22:51:17 2011 Return-Path: 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 A8FCA3A6882 for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:51:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RDNS_NONE=0.1] 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 gn62IvTBZU-Y for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1349C3A685B for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:51:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ70025TUZUV2@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:52:42 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ700D0QUZU0Z@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:52:42 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml06-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJ700116UZTUS@szxml06-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:52:42 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 11:06:40 +0530 From: Santhana In-reply-to: To: 'arif khan' Message-id: <349CFFAADE5241DEB00123576D3619DB@china.huawei.com> Organization: Htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: Acvznbo6oIH7HltzT9SUEl4fDByJiAAfnmwg References: <4691873B40F2477AAAC33D88DF7D99F5@china.huawei.com> Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 05:51:17 -0000 Hi I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which message COO/XCO should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits.... Regards Santhanakrishnan -----Original Message----- From: arif khan [mailto:arif15jan@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 7:58 PM To: santhana@huawei.com Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links Yes ....It is possible with broadband support at the SCCP and MTP3 Level for HSL Regards -arif On 4/5/11, Santhana wrote: > Hi > > I am not sure whether I can send queries regarding MTP3 in this WG. If > I am wrong pls suggest the group from which I can get the below MTP3 query > clarified. > > > > My Query: > > Can MTP2 be run on 1.5/2M links ? > > > > In Q.703 it is explained that for the ChangeOver procedures of 2M > links extended sequence number may be used for FSN/BSN transporting. It is > also mentioned that the extended sequence numbers should be of 12 bits in > this case. > > In the Note(6) page no 82, it refers to Q.2210(MTP3B) specification. > > > > Does this mean that for 2M MTP2 links XCO/XCA should be exchanged? > > > > But as per this Q.2210 the XCO/XCA use a 24 bit sequence number. But > above in Q.703 only 12 bits is suggested for 2M links. How to use this > XCO/XCA for 2M links ? Can we use least significant 12 bits of the XCO FSN > parameter to convey the 12 bit sequence number ? > > > > Pls help me understand this point. > > > > Thanks & Regards > > Santhanakrishnan > > From David.Laight@ACULAB.COM Wed Apr 6 01:02:18 2011 Return-Path: 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 3AB413A68CC for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:02:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 nSTBYGQ2C5zx for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:02:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.aculab.com (mx0.aculab.com [213.249.233.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 42CD83A69AE for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 6919 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2011 08:03:53 -0000 Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by mx0.aculab.com with SMTP; 6 Apr 2011 08:03:53 -0000 Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.aculab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 05183-09 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:03:52 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 6903 invoked by uid 599); 6 Apr 2011 08:03:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO saturn3.Aculab.com) (10.202.163.5) by mx0.aculab.com (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 09:03:52 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:03:31 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <349CFFAADE5241DEB00123576D3619DB@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links Thread-Index: Acvznbo6oIH7HltzT9SUEl4fDByJiAAfnmwgAAUGRXA= From: "David Laight" To: , "arif khan" X-Virus-Scanned: by iCritical at mx0.aculab.com Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 08:02:18 -0000 =20 > Hi > I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I > wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which=20 > message COO/XCO > should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits.... I don't see a problem with putting a 12bit sequence number into a 24bit field (much harder the other way around!). The 2M/1.5M links from Q.703 Annex A certainly are used (or have been used!). We've been asked whether we support them, but only for 'tick box' filling, none of our customers has actually asked us to support them (the difficulty is getting the timeslot data through the tdm cross bar switch and the falcs without generating a 'shear' midway through the tdm frame. My suspicions are the the SIGTRAN protocols are being used for any links that need to carry large traffic loads. David From santhana@huawei.com Wed Apr 6 01:56:03 2011 Return-Path: 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 1F13D3A68E6 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:56:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.228, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1] 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 SM5lde4zK32X for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E673A681D for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 01:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ800IF33J6WM@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:57:06 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJ800D0E3J5OP@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:57:06 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJ8006HD3J4R8@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:57:05 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:11:03 +0530 From: Santhana In-reply-to: To: 'David Laight' , 'arif khan' Message-id: Organization: Htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: Acvznbo6oIH7HltzT9SUEl4fDByJiAAfnmwgAAUGRXAAAVf1sA== References: <349CFFAADE5241DEB00123576D3619DB@china.huawei.com> Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 08:56:03 -0000 Hi David Thanks for your opinion. Pls check inline. -----Original Message----- From: David Laight [mailto:David.Laight@ACULAB.COM] Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 1:34 PM To: santhana@huawei.com; arif khan Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Sigtran] [MTP3] Change Over procedure for 2M TDM links > Hi > I was asking in MTP2 level whether 2M links can be used. Also I > wanted the details of ChangeOver procedures like , which > message COO/XCO > should be used and what is the FSN parameter size 12bits or 24bits.... I don't see a problem with putting a 12bit sequence number into a 24bit field (much harder the other way around!). --> I also think this way. But there is no explicit note about this in the Spec, both in Q.703 or Q.2210. The 2M/1.5M links from Q.703 Annex A certainly are used (or have been used!). We've been asked whether we support them, but only for 'tick box' filling, none of our customers has actually asked us to support them (the difficulty is getting the timeslot data through the tdm cross bar switch and the falcs without generating a 'shear' midway through the tdm frame. My suspicions are the the SIGTRAN protocols are being used for any links that need to carry large traffic loads. --> What u mean here? SIGTRAN protocols like M3UA, SUA have no restriction on the DATA size/length by the very Standard, as they run over IP. Even there can be(there is) a SG of M3UA-MTP3B(SAAL links) also. David + Santhana From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Wed Apr 13 08:06:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3394CE079C for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F9lTUv6fQDHe for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A380E0778 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so163741gyf.31 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=FkI6jlxmDH4HoKeRuTds+wHITvojrr2esaJIGhIp7AA=; b=wvFnfmgLTZkEi+Sk/5yIEpUJyo4MtIprBJs7k2h/0EugWU52EUoBHSnBLcxf/QIvV9 4KiFsCihs/oYJYjzSB+Nxt3tg+4C7NEVJNByRDKxwTkMdOhie/w+QlxNFX13Vmhmdpgl uq/1uPNXYKSwnhh5KIGMySv1/o6hkIg8uSl8I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=BMo1aDLZln0OxBdMiUtIu4LsJbhR+v5vImNG/8f1r3Tquba+bxV/8HCodWtaPV5wxR BgaiHV2Bi6CyVxdBFE20XCEpDwbZT5d6sr78QJVJ5lk4MIu/y34d1+7sQj3B4VOahwWl zgVJUBC3Yo+N0/cgBBhccAi9WAYcfWdZR6Liw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.43.44.6 with SMTP id ue6mr11968135icb.69.1302707217941; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:06:57 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=bcaec52999dff8c35b04a0ce287e Subject: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:06:59 -0000 --bcaec52999dff8c35b04a0ce287e Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec52999dff8c35704a0ce287c --bcaec52999dff8c35704a0ce287c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the ASP and the 2 SGP. Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? I am using M3UA rfc3332. Please help. -- Best Regards Abdelkader Mosbah --bcaec52999dff8c35704a0ce287c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi,


I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the ASP and the 2 SGP.


Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?


I am using M3UA rfc3332.


Please help.


--
Best Regards
Abdelkader Mosbah
--bcaec52999dff8c35704a0ce287c-- --bcaec52999dff8c35b04a0ce287e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="alignement_m3uauser_asp_sgp1_sgp2_wo_sctp.txt" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="alignement_m3uauser_asp_sgp1_sgp2_wo_sctp.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Attachment-Id: f_gmge9hxr0 fFRpbWUgICAgIHwgMTkyLjE2OC4xLjE0MCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IDE5Mi4x NjguMS4xNzAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfAp8ICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICB8IDE5Mi4xNjguMS4xNDUgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCnwxOCwzMTMg ICB8ICAgICAgICAgQVNQVVAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICB8TTNVQSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBBU1BVUCAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICAtLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0+ICAoMjkwNSkgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwKfDE5LDgwMCAgIHwg ICAgICAgICBBU1BVUF9BQ0sgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IEFTUFVQX0FDSyAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tICAoMjkwNSkgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwKfDIyLDU5NCAgIHwg ICAgICAgICBOVEZZICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IE5URlkgCnwgICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUpICAgPC0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLSAgKDI5MDUpICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8CnwzMiwxNjkgICB8ICAgICAg ICAgQVNQVVAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8TTNV QSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBBU1BVUCAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLT4gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDMzLDcyOCAgIHwgICAgICAgICBB U1BVUF9BQ0sgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChS RkMgMzMzMik6IEFTUFVQX0FDSyAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDM1LDU5MiAgIHwgICAgICAgICBB U1BBQyAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChS RkMgMzMzMik6IEFTUEFDIAp8ICAgICAgICAgfCgyOTA1KSAgIC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLT4g ICgyOTA1KSAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfAp8MzYsMzU2ICAgfCAgICAgICAgIE5URlkg ICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfE0zVUEgKFJGQyAz MzMyKTogTlRGWSAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDM5LDI1OSAgIHwgICAgICAgICBBU1BBQ19BQ0sg fCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6 IEFTUEFDX0FDSyAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tICAoMjkw NSkgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwKfDQxLDgzNiAgIHwgICAgICAgICBOVEZZICAgICAg fCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6 IE5URlkgCnwgICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUpICAgPC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSAgKDI5MDUpICAg fCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8Cnw0Myw3ODAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgQVNQQUMgICAgIHwgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8TTNVQSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBBU1BB QyAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLT4gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDQ3LDEzMiAgIHwgICAgICAgICBBU1BBQ19BQ0sgfCAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IEFTUEFDX0FD SyAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDQ5LDY0MyAgIHwgICAgICAgICBOVEZZICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IE5URlkgCnwg ICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUpICAgPC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t ICAoMjkwNSkgICB8Cnw1NCwxODkgICB8ICAgICAgICAgREFVRCAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8TTNVQSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBEQVVEIAp8ICAgICAg ICAgfCgyOTA1KSAgIC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLT4gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgfAp8NjMsNTA4ICAgfCAgICAgICAgIERBVkEgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfE0zVUEgKFJGQyAzMzMyKTogREFWQSAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwo MjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tICAoMjkwNSkgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IHwKfDYzLDkwMSAgIHwgICAgICAgICBEQVVEICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IERBVUQgCnwgICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUp ICAgLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tPiAgKDI5MDUpICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8Cnw2 NywxNTIgICB8ICAgICAgICAgREFWQSAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICB8TTNVQSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBEQVZBIAp8ICAgICAgICAgfCgyOTA1KSAgIDwt LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfAp8NjcsMjM0 ICAgfCAgICAgICAgIERBVUQgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgfE0zVUEgKFJGQyAzMzMyKTogREFVRCAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICAtLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLT4gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDcyLDA3OCAgIHwg ICAgICAgICBEQVZBICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMzMik6IERBVkEgCnwgICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUpICAgPC0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tICAoMjkwNSkgICB8Cnw3Myw3OTggICB8ICAgICAg ICAgREFWQSAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8TTNV QSAoUkZDIDMzMzIpOiBEQVZBIAp8ICAgICAgICAgfCgyOTA1KSAgIDwtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfAp8NzUsMDkxICAgfCAgICAgICAgIERB VkEgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfE0zVUEgKFJG QyAzMzMyKTogREFWQSAKfCAgICAgICAgIHwoMjkwNSkgICA8LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0gICgyOTA1KSAgIHwKfDc2LDYzNCAgIHwgICAgICAgICBEQVZBICAg ICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxNM1VBIChSRkMgMzMz Mik6IERBVkEgCnwgICAgICAgICB8KDI5MDUpICAgPC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSAgKDI5MDUp ICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8Cg== --bcaec52999dff8c35b04a0ce287e-- From bidulock@openss7.org Wed Apr 13 17:27:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3EDE0754 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:27:01 -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=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4uKEJWRBvozk for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FFA8E072E for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3E0Qqon010612; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:26:53 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3E0Qqea014652; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:26:52 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3E0QqKT014651; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:26:52 -0600 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:26:52 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: mosbah abdelkader Message-ID: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 00:27:01 -0000 mosbah, What did you think was the matter with it? --brian mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:06:57) > Hi, > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the > ASP and the 2 SGP. > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > Please help. > -- > Best Regards > Abdelkader Mosbah -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Wed Apr 13 21:23:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87EA9E07E4 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M9t9LGchkfor for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97B5FE076A for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so1460028iye.31 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:34 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=RSzJEijV5syy8UwDkFoS8FIamYuEvFsxkfHowdxypnU=; b=PCw89nciuGCFWJDY9XETrgSqWZsGiwpB4Cic0m9bPUccV/sB6JkZIdFuv5WsPjAb/N kly+F8vZOLERU4lURhOudZ2LEoF5GaKHHDmy/kfa7NKhqa5evDnLcn0V0vY1p2hrwncU FBwPcWI6i3/iEkJuRx+irUWL0EwcOrxcjaUhQ= 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 :content-type; b=MxpR8Z425B8QA9TjkvxH+sKiI8xIviuxl9ELISd5FqTl59x7crKunTG55IBN0EXLtf 8Dczn4Ev71MEhCTd+ioNsS+m/x+/clx5PJeOiJ15ouzEeAKv26CUtjFWkPP1hqCQquos ZVCJgJwpjm6yip1tho6CQwmrHwepyLAoU6soQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.185.196 with SMTP id cp4mr285577ibb.56.1302755012313; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:23:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:23:32 +0200 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d274d5bd012f04a0d9492b Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:23:35 -0000 --0016e6d274d5bd012f04a0d9492b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I want just to know if that config works with other implementations. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > mosbah, > > What did you think was the matter with it? > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:06:57) > > Hi, > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > Please help. > > -- > > Best Regards > > Abdelkader Mosbah > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > bidulock@openss7.org > http://www.openss7.org/ > --0016e6d274d5bd012f04a0d9492b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I want just to know if that config works with other implem= entations.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 A= M, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

What did you think was the matter with it?

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Wed, 13 A= pr 2011 16:06:57)
> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 S= GP
> =A0 =A0(STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow betwee= n the
> =A0 =A0ASP and the 2 SGP.
> =A0 =A0Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications?
> =A0 =A0I am using M3UA rfc3332.
> =A0 =A0Please help.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0Best Regards
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah

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

--0016e6d274d5bd012f04a0d9492b-- From suresh.jaddu@nsn.com Wed Apr 13 21:25:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E947E076A for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:25:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i08sA8wQQKNs for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BEBE0707 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p3E4P0Ya018034 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:25:00 +0200 Received: from demuexc025.nsn-intra.net (demuexc025.nsn-intra.net [10.159.32.12]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p3E4Ov1O017802; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:25:00 +0200 Received: from SGSIEXC017.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.224.99]) by demuexc025.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:24:43 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CBFA5A.85819BB3" Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:14:59 +0800 Message-ID: <53078B21B5DDA14BA1E89B400224A33502F55679@SGSIEXC017.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP Thread-Index: Acv57HLB71FGcPyWQmiZccYhxfOULgAbOHrA References: From: "Jaddu, Suresh (NSN - IN/Bangalore)" To: "ext mosbah abdelkader" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Apr 2011 04:24:43.0468 (UTC) FILETIME=[E109E0C0:01CBFA5B] Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:25:05 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBFA5A.85819BB3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable it looks fine to me. I believe one SGP or more the initial message sequence will not change. =20 Suresh. ________________________________ From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext mosbah abdelkader Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 8:37 PM To: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP Hi, I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between the ASP and the 2 SGP. Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? I am using M3UA rfc3332. Please help. -- Best Regards Abdelkader Mosbah ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBFA5A.85819BB3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
it=20 looks fine to me. I believe one SGP or more the initial message = sequence=20 will not change.
 
Suresh.

From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext mosbah=20 abdelkader
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 8:37 = PM
To:=20 sigtran@ietf.org
Subject: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA = association=20 setup between 1 ASP and2 SGP

Hi,


I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP=20 communicates with 2 SGP (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA = message flow=20 between the ASP and the 2 SGP.


Is this sequence correct = regarding=20 M3UA specifications?


I am using M3UA = rfc3332.


Please=20 help.


--
Best Regards
Abdelkader = Mosbah
------_=_NextPart_001_01CBFA5A.85819BB3-- From bidulock@openss7.org Wed Apr 13 22:34:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A302E069D for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:34:13 -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=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qfe06VXt376m for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 022F1E0670 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3E5Y6li015717; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:34:06 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3E5Y62g019348; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:34:06 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3E5Y6aU019347; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:34:06 -0600 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:34:06 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: mosbah abdelkader Message-ID: <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 05:34:13 -0000 mosbah, RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. --brian mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:23:32) > I want just to know if that config works with other implementations. > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > <[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > mosbah, > What did you think was the matter with it? > --brian > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 > 16:06:57) > > > Hi, > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between > the > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > Please help. > > -- > > Best Regards > > Abdelkader Mosbah -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 03:57:08 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798BDE066A for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5Cn14FyCdIuj for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41C2E0670 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so1775976iye.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=rrou57AlWDeHiyUoehCLQAjt9IOUM8JIHKhDt9AITm0=; b=RL4WPt9ZoLApLmafefOf0kxOW9xCH0TsYuYq9sxBkhwccpnjo+C8LJZQ+MWbxTpIaW ZcDlI9faLjpziotxlL8hX2tOkTst6dZc9SlfWy7OglyeriESEuEw2ho48PwA7yH5Wc2W Nfzom2HeQJSLMwrX8d403uampanrA1CkC7TfM= 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 :content-type; b=tm/OP8kMpXIIbxA7ybAYr6etHDYcEDnyOW7V1go5MXm0/vEYEabqxqIji970mwgUQJ akjSkdu8ZsKDoXXwCFE7cBhYThggPm7Kv5XwgG07GG2XQmWY2ouLU9meDYc8+/3wf9IH udXN39RqbeUwkgdTiMO4x0QBk5ULaqKq9zbc0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.196.233 with SMTP id eh41mr591762ibb.6.1302778623160; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:57:03 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502bb180df28e04a0dec9ec Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:57:08 -0000 --00504502bb180df28e04a0dec9ec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ok Brian, Thank you. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > mosbah, > > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 > 06:23:32) > > I want just to know if that config works with other implementations. > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > > <[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > > > mosbah, > > What did you think was the matter with it? > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 > > 16:06:57) > > > > > Hi, > > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP > > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between > > the > > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > > Please help. > > > -- > > > Best Regards > > > Abdelkader Mosbah > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > bidulock@openss7.org > http://www.openss7.org/ > --00504502bb180df28e04a0dec9ec Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok Brian,

Thank you.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

RFC 3332 is long obsolete. =A0Don't use it. =A0Your
implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable.

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0(Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:23:32)
> =A0 =A0I want just to know if that config works with= other implementations.
> =A0 =A0On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
> =A0 =A0<[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah,
> =A0 =A0 =A0What did you think was the matter with it?
> =A0 =A0 =A0--brian
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 (Wed, 13 Apr 2011
> =A0 =A0 =A016:06:57)
>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communica= tes with 2 SGP
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0(STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message= flow between
> =A0 =A0the
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0ASP and the 2 SGP.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specificati= ons?
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I am using M3UA rfc3332.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Please help.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Best Regards
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah

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

--00504502bb180df28e04a0dec9ec-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 08:21:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0536EE078D for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yS1kigYpPGPW for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yi0-f44.google.com (mail-yi0-f44.google.com [209.85.218.44]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29276E0766 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yic13 with SMTP id 13so943070yic.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:33 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=ZMpeN41TZp+E2/kzf8lIvsGtzOQVNtcosR87mMcWPrA=; b=PFRwl8Z4ss1ouhx0dVL4zV4Y87kUgwSnlxlLfAF9beP+XU2bLRQGLtzj+sWCJJKth2 t4cm2iWwfxVmohHm1lh30ghbTbGv0u+AFgKAGItxuKasAJehR7CDYM92YScNApN5Mri6 j8EE1QIRvSzWa7SxDzqvGLNWA7+zsUGnTOot4= 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 :content-type; b=nlpot42eBsNt6gQzssmfouS2CEMSqfFCAcjATmLh9FgYG+Xwowrt+hB64hQBJy1Jhg gWs4PyNBhd34t53WcMLphgctNNZmB7pRR+QzmUe4HLGtkHhqNaNsGJA+WczIp/EaGH3f 71OP9l1Qzzy8ichAmWH5IDnAPOaZq8nU+LWrE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.1.18 with SMTP id 18mr1265013ice.203.1302794492567; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:21:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:21:32 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba181860f1dfef04a0e27a33 Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:21:35 -0000 --90e6ba181860f1dfef04a0e27a33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Brian, Dialogic SS7 stack still use rfc3332. A time ago, We have provided an mono-homed M3UA stack implementing rfc3332 to a customer and they have used it with France Telecom network and it works properly. Now we are implementing the multi-homed version with connection to more than one STP in the ASP side. The message flow that I have sent in the first mail shows the interaction of the ASP with 2 SGP (STP). So, supposing we are using rfc3332, still this configuration correct for the interaction between an ASP and 2 STP? Any guidance is very appreciated. -- BR Abdelkader Mosbah On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > mosbah, > > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 > 06:23:32) > > I want just to know if that config works with other implementations. > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > > <[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > > > mosbah, > > What did you think was the matter with it? > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 > > 16:06:57) > > > > > Hi, > > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 SGP > > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow between > > the > > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > > Please help. > > > -- > > > Best Regards > > > Abdelkader Mosbah > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > bidulock@openss7.org > http://www.openss7.org/ > --90e6ba181860f1dfef04a0e27a33 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Brian,

Dialogic SS7 stack still use rfc3332. A t= ime ago, We have provided an mono-homed M3UA stack implementing rfc3332 to = a customer and they have used it with France Telecom network and it works p= roperly.

Now we are implementing the multi-homed version with connection to more= than one STP in the ASP side.

The message flow that I have sent in = the first mail shows the interaction of the ASP with 2 SGP (STP).

So, supposing we are using rfc3332, still this configuration correct for th= e interaction between an ASP and 2 STP?

Any guidance is very appreci= ated.

--
BR
Abdelkader Mosbah

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <= ;bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

RFC 3332 is long obsolete. =A0Don't use it. =A0Your
implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable.

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0(Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:23:32)
> =A0 =A0I want just to know if that config works with= other implementations.
> =A0 =A0On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
> =A0 =A0<[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah,
> =A0 =A0 =A0What did you think was the matter with it?
> =A0 =A0 =A0--brian
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 (Wed, 13 Apr 2011
> =A0 =A0 =A016:06:57)
>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communica= tes with 2 SGP
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0(STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message= flow between
> =A0 =A0the
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0ASP and the 2 SGP.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specificati= ons?
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I am using M3UA rfc3332.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Please help.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Best Regards
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah

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

--90e6ba181860f1dfef04a0e27a33-- From bidulock@openss7.org Thu Apr 14 08:50:47 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89BAEE0762 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:50:47 -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=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q+YHexLlvFUy for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920C2E06A4 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3EFogDB026573; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:50:42 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3EFogon030252; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:50:42 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3EFofNi030251; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:50:41 -0600 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:50:41 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: mosbah abdelkader Message-ID: <20110414155041.GA30076@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:50:47 -0000 mosbah, Although it may appear at first blush that RFC 3332 and RFC 4666 interoperate, they do not. Someone in France is risking their SS7 network to save a couple of bucks? Tsk, tsk. --brian mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:21:32) > Hi Brian, > Dialogic SS7 stack still use rfc3332. A time ago, We have provided an > mono-homed M3UA stack implementing rfc3332 to a customer and they have > used it with France Telecom network and it works properly. > Now we are implementing the multi-homed version with connection to more > than one STP in the ASP side. > The message flow that I have sent in the first mail shows the > interaction of the ASP with 2 SGP (STP). > So, supposing we are using rfc3332, still this configuration correct > for the interaction between an ASP and 2 STP? > Any guidance is very appreciated. > -- > BR > Abdelkader Mosbah > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > <[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > mosbah, > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. > --brian > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 > 06:23:32) > > > I want just to know if that config works with other > implementations. > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > > > <[1][2]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > > > mosbah, > > What did you think was the matter with it? > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 > > 16:06:57) > > > > > Hi, > > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with 2 > SGP > > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow > between > > the > > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > > Please help. > > > -- > > > Best Regards > > > Abdelkader Mosbah > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > [3]bidulock@openss7.org > [4]http://www.openss7.org/ > > References > > 1. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > 2. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > 3. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > 4. http://www.openss7.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 09:17:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF86BE07EC for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nptXmirkzkhw for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B11F0E0762 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2036042iwn.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=bm2DPbeIRDiecgCWP5zhFFMFOslWr3JNXdew+RzABZI=; b=YWeN0+5f3tRGxXtUMKimnjgkAZdKrs8QlZLxzvSfkLydruW4x9SrLortq6ART8ublf wzmJrXxjfV12acvxk5JeCUvhfPv50xOibNJ4ET4vnuLED/fahAkUGN5QKMOEQRJ2hp0F oDrtVGEUu9/QIjWD1yww8Htowr1bslhrj/YVw= 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 :content-type; b=YrJfLXUqFxyUCA9rWLUhn7xqIGjg7Ua/WGcz/cY0EHmyJLNF8inLtr11cfNKiEXF7A 5+JbjbNRbvScZ3KhksSBG82j2dyZmBVMnyYBdar/ZtuHuIiUu7KzXdGLH5UmhY1sJ2Q7 VLmyt+jp9gCxqgRU0mkEYlYHsH0gn3KGk9KDY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.17.4 with SMTP id q4mr838405iba.81.1302797870166; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110414155041.GA30076@openss7.org> References: <20110414002652.GA14465@openss7.org> <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> <20110414155041.GA30076@openss7.org> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:17:50 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000325574d8243f66a04a0e34478 Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:17:52 -0000 --000325574d8243f66a04a0e34478 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 It is not a question of interoperability especially if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. My question is simple and clear: using rfc3332, is the message flow in question, between an ASP and 2 STP, correct. If you do not have the response, please let other persons take the response !!! Thank you. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > mosbah, > > Although it may appear at first blush that RFC 3332 and RFC 4666 > interoperate, they do not. Someone in France is risking their > SS7 network to save a couple of bucks? Tsk, tsk. > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, > 14 Apr 2011 16:21:32) > > Hi Brian, > > Dialogic SS7 stack still use rfc3332. A time ago, We have provided an > > mono-homed M3UA stack implementing rfc3332 to a customer and they have > > used it with France Telecom network and it works properly. > > Now we are implementing the multi-homed version with connection to > more > > than one STP in the ASP side. > > The message flow that I have sent in the first mail shows the > > interaction of the ASP with 2 SGP (STP). > > So, supposing we are using rfc3332, still this configuration correct > > for the interaction between an ASP and 2 STP? > > Any guidance is very appreciated. > > -- > > BR > > Abdelkader Mosbah > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > > <[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > > > mosbah, > > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Thu, 14 Apr 2011 > > 06:23:32) > > > > > I want just to know if that config works with other > > implementations. > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > > > > > <[1][2]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > > > > > mosbah, > > > What did you think was the matter with it? > > > --brian > > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Wed, 13 Apr 2011 > > > 16:06:57) > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I have an M3UA configuration where an ASP communicates with > 2 > > SGP > > > > (STP). The file attached describes the M3UA message flow > > between > > > the > > > > ASP and the 2 SGP. > > > > Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA specifications? > > > > I am using M3UA rfc3332. > > > > Please help. > > > > -- > > > > Best Regards > > > > Abdelkader Mosbah > > -- > > Brian F. G. Bidulock > > [3]bidulock@openss7.org > > [4]http://www.openss7.org/ > > > > References > > > > 1. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > > 2. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > > 3. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > > 4. http://www.openss7.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > Sigtran@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > bidulock@openss7.org > http://www.openss7.org/ > --000325574d8243f66a04a0e34478 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It is not a question of interoperability especially if the= 2 ends are using rfc3332.

My question is simple and clear: using rf= c3332, is the message flow in question, between an ASP and 2 STP, correct.<= br>
If you do not have the response, please let other persons take the resp= onse !!!


Thank you.

On Thu, Ap= r 14, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:=
mosbah,

Although it may appear at first blush that RFC 3332 and RFC 4666
interoperate, they do not. =A0Someone in France is risking their
SS7 network to save a couple of bucks? =A0Tsk, tsk.

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:21:32)
> =A0 =A0Hi Brian,
> =A0 =A0Dialogic SS7 stack still use rfc3332. A time ago, We have provi= ded an
> =A0 =A0mono-homed M3UA stack implementing rfc3332 to a customer and th= ey have
> =A0 =A0used it with France Telecom network and it works properly.
> =A0 =A0Now we are implementing the multi-homed version with connection= to more
> =A0 =A0than one STP in the ASP side.
> =A0 =A0The message flow that I have sent in the first mail shows the > =A0 =A0interaction of the ASP with 2 SGP (STP).
> =A0 =A0So, supposing we are using rfc3332, still this configuration co= rrect
> =A0 =A0for the interaction between an ASP and 2 STP?
> =A0 =A0Any guidance is very appreciated.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0BR
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah
> =A0 =A0On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
> =A0 =A0<[1]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah,
> =A0 =A0 =A0RFC 3332 is long obsolete. =A0Don't use it. =A0Your
> =A0 =A0 =A0implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable.
> =A0 =A0 =A0--brian
> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(Thu, 14 Apr 2011
> =A0 =A0 =A006:23:32)
>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I want just to know if that config works with other=
> =A0 =A0implementations.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulo= ck
>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0<[1][2]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
> =A0 =A0>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah,
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0 =A0What did you think was the matter with it?
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0 =A0--brian
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Wed, 13 Apr 2011
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0 =A016:06:57)
> =A0 =A0>
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I have an M3UA configuration where an A= SP communicates with 2
> =A0 =A0SGP
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0(STP). The file attached describes the = M3UA message flow
> =A0 =A0between
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0the
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0ASP and the 2 SGP.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Is this sequence correct regarding M3UA= specifications?
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0I am using M3UA rfc3332.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Please help.
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Best Regards
> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0Brian F. G. Bidulock
> =A0 =A0[3]bidulock@opens= s7.org
> =A0 =A0[4]http:/= /www.openss7.org/
>
> References
>
> =A0 =A01. mailto:bidulock@open= ss7.org
> =A0 =A02. mailto:bidulock@open= ss7.org
> =A0 =A03. mailto:bidulock@open= ss7.org
> =A0 =A04. http:/= /www.openss7.org/

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


--

--000325574d8243f66a04a0e34478-- From David.Laight@ACULAB.COM Thu Apr 14 09:18:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F86E0762 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:18:48 -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=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RIb4ZkJY2m5k for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.aculab.com (mx0.aculab.com [213.249.233.131]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 69005E0749 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 31464 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2011 16:18:43 -0000 Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by mx0.aculab.com with SMTP; 14 Apr 2011 16:18:43 -0000 Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.aculab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 30519-04 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:18:42 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 31439 invoked by uid 599); 14 Apr 2011 16:18:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO saturn3.Aculab.com) (10.202.163.5) by mx0.aculab.com (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:18:42 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:18:11 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASPand 2 SGP Thread-Index: Acv6ZYxRn9qX5RMWQxqu6PtIY5hPbQAWaE9g From: "David Laight" To: , "mosbah abdelkader" X-Virus-Scanned: by iCritical at mx0.aculab.com Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASPand 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:18:48 -0000 =20 > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. Does a certain large, well known, network equipment supplier support RFC 4666 yet? We had to add a bodge because it doesn't bother to tell loadsharing ASP the state (so we won't send data and reject received data ...) David From David.Laight@ACULAB.COM Thu Apr 14 09:20:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D297CE0762 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:20:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.255 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.745, BAYES_05=-1.11, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kb8E299K4pNA for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.aculab.com (mx0.aculab.com [213.249.233.131]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F1368E0749 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 32008 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2011 16:20:14 -0000 Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by mx0.aculab.com with SMTP; 14 Apr 2011 16:20:14 -0000 Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.aculab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 24302-10 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:20:13 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 31979 invoked by uid 599); 14 Apr 2011 16:20:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO saturn3.Aculab.com) (10.202.163.5) by mx0.aculab.com (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:20:13 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:19:41 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP Thread-Index: Acv6v3XNpu/H6yO3Rue0h3VfRMjcLwAACreQ From: "David Laight" To: "mosbah abdelkader" , , X-Virus-Scanned: by iCritical at mx0.aculab.com Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:20:20 -0000 > It is not a question of interoperability especially > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. rfc3332 doesn't work! A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 10:25:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 787C4E0747 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w3hMhRYPLumg for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C14C0E0716 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2086872iwn.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:58 -0700 (PDT) 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=ftOfBWeB1MuV//sDychGTzuJRsUM+jgf5qsc3whBehA=; b=uOo1KWXBpL0p4l98N+pcoJxkmJDl/5IeDg0dWtyGIK5vZFXuAQPm7lrnK17n5egrr2 VE2pA0BEK02fQufXS2Z+8q1R5/3O8rB6kHfnjUmPpLH25BdOAE7RogCx1KCDHLZ8utxX qwDS00ymPZQYe6FsVb7FFIxBv2UUkAXCHMRrE= 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=qWiRN0ACMkwh0oWH6b1Bab+kSpWFwpPQPifjJXYaAY4YeNV8hm11etJB2IJ9uXlsr+ prXnkWFe6jcEQsng2hGinsgbsAuO6W/IlsitiM7IKhQCyOaA+GhX66QzxGcSiynPEY5P lvZljrPPb7A2MmUTVomDz0tfsnO6sjm4I0VQE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.34.139 with SMTP id l11mr914652ibd.31.1302801958394; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:25:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414053406.GA18769@openss7.org> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:25:58 +0200 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: David Laight Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=485b3974781ef15d6104a0e437ed Cc: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASPand 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:25:59 -0000 --485b3974781ef15d6104a0e437ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I am sorry for providing an incorrct information: Our M3UA rfc3332 implementation is not used yet in any carrier network. I have got the correct info from my customer: They are using it internally with Dialogic Stack. Thank you for help and I am sorry again. -- BR On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:18 PM, David Laight wrote: > > > RFC 3332 is long obsolete. Don't use it. Your > > implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable. > > Does a certain large, well known, network equipment supplier > support RFC 4666 yet? > > We had to add a bodge because it doesn't bother to tell > loadsharing ASP the state (so we won't send data and > reject received data ...) > > David > > > --485b3974781ef15d6104a0e437ed Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,


I am sorry for providing an incorrct inform= ation: Our M3UA rfc3332 implementation is not used yet in any carrier netwo= rk. I have got the correct info from my customer: They are using it interna= lly with Dialogic Stack.


Thank you for help and I am sorry again.

--
BR

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:18 PM, David Laight <David.Laight@ac= ulab.com> wrote:

> RFC 3332 is long obsolete. =A0Don't use it. =A0Your
> implementation must meet RFC 4666 to be interoperable.

Does a certain large, well known, network equipment supplier
support RFC 4666 yet?

We had to add a bodge because it doesn't bother to tell
loadsharing ASP the state (so we won't send data and
reject received data ...)

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0David



--485b3974781ef15d6104a0e437ed-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 10:28:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 979BAE0774 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XuApt+1W7ATU for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069A9E079C for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2088956iwn.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:49 -0700 (PDT) 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=54Sv5JTsP66DoV6LhUkuArrTSgA0eEehaEBm2NJ/6ak=; b=PrmdrCF0u9CX1xhN3U1c/zfNma2wKUv0kLce+9ucX2/osFebJpn3HF6LxaX/pbcATN xNzByo00YiKlw8s92G2TmPViMfdCTZ/RcW5mG3pYUNoC+2C7BV1dF/eHvzF4nRfCdLbH EwJ8M2aE+Yrwl6IP3bFY/Ao1uxJNhiIbIk3nY= 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=LLtw3KZgA1Vo+N1sXdBEtHeDwePz69C72qAERCmL8LdXZgWxxRVw+iAEnbN/80F/m9 43RbV29FKEHb+btgfl2SU6R9wg0e0JZZAMy9KvsRpTfofb/3GPgvqwA5d/UEJ9A2ZLeA IIu4gsaKP46uemyGzzuZX2kpfk27fcpZ5buNg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.34.139 with SMTP id l11mr917588ibd.31.1302802129558; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:28:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:28:49 +0200 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: David Laight Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=485b3974781e251f3e04a0e44254 Cc: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:28:50 -0000 --485b3974781e251f3e04a0e44254 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ok. I can say again that Dialogic still use rfc3332. You can see that in their website. They havn't yet updated to rfc4446. If I respect rfc3332, my stack can still work with Dialogic M3UA implementation. -- BR On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:19 PM, David Laight wrote: > > It is not a question of interoperability especially > > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. > > rfc3332 doesn't work! > A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. > > > --485b3974781e251f3e04a0e44254 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok.

I can say again that Dialogic still use rfc3332= . You can see that in their website. They havn't yet updated to rfc4446= .


If I respect rfc3332, my stack can still work with Dialogic M3= UA implementation.

--
BR

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:19= PM, David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> It is not a question of interoperability especially<= br> > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332.

rfc3332 doesn't work!
A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state.



--485b3974781e251f3e04a0e44254-- From cbenson@adax.com Thu Apr 14 10:33:08 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3DCE07F2 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:33:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.774 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.774 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rsEdRc9yg8xM for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.adax.com (mail1.adax.com [208.201.231.104]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C57E0768 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adax (adax [12.0.0.88]) by mail1.adax.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85F2120A01; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:33:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by adax (Postfix, from userid 243) id A0A9C8EDE1; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by adax (Postfix) with ESMTP id 989CB8EDE0; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Benson X-X-Sender: cbenson@adax.adax To: David Laight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: bidulock@openss7.org, mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:33:08 -0000 David, >> rfc3332 doesn't work! >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. Do you mean, even if the SG/SGP fully implements all NOTIFY aspects of RFC 3332 Section 4.3.4.5? Or do you mean "it" doesn't work if the SHOULD of Paragraph 2 is taken to mean "DON'T BOTHER"? With thanks, from Chris Benson. On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, David Laight wrote: >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:19:41 +0100 >> From: David Laight >> To: mosbah abdelkader , >> , >> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP >> and 2 SGP >> >> > It is not a question of interoperability especially >> > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. >> >> rfc3332 doesn't work! >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sigtran mailing list >> Sigtran@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 10:35:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A438E0749 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.298 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ieevUqLV7d+W for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86500E0690 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2094165iwn.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=0BtkcO8Eu4kQkzI7g6e+CpLWEui5wec+JQF75mCFcsU=; b=ovtgTi9D6qJHLECpoakXKme83lZycVY1gAEfv6XDaiU2p4Ww45DkG8oUZ9ogXPRM99 F/OCFd0AL19zVpScUedZJ7WW4PO68Z54Zga9sTFqiQutsALnv3zewAUYKMNNmEeKaLJs D3XyLwM3lgGUW81W7mytt+GUNndGjAHh31HHE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=n+Qkb6hJXVu38sQqsFxsPaMundAQdXWzxzJ42aY1aqI2kYE9pYvU197IKK2BtsR7RF 80VFgngqTvJEcAPZn2HlXQt2BhWe108zBSVujHxbbD3ls+JPDQmbUIjZnatCSG4hsXka bGoCLSRgAw0cLT2mN4TwanHP3TRJPrtnt58Pw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.43.44.6 with SMTP id ue6mr1457285icb.69.1302802550270; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:35:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec52999df38a9f104a0e45be0 Subject: [Sigtran] Getting active SCTP sockets, their properties and listening on them for outgoing and incoming SCTP traffic X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:35:51 -0000 --bcaec52999df38a9f104a0e45be0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi I need to get active SCTP sockets, their properties and listen for SCTP traffic on my machine directly from the SCTP sockets established (I don't want to do a network capture directly). How to do that? The sctp implementation doesn't matter (lksctp,...etc): I want just the idea to do that. -- BR --bcaec52999df38a9f104a0e45be0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi


I need to get active SCTP sockets, their properties and listen for SCTP
traffic on my machine directly from the SCTP sockets established (I don't
want to do a network capture directly). How to do that?


The sctp implementation doesn't matter (lksctp,...etc): I want just the idea to do that.


--
BR
--bcaec52999df38a9f104a0e45be0-- From ankisharma@gmail.com Thu Apr 14 10:46:41 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8989EE06CD for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G-vlY75fMuXZ for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E539FE0690 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so1369741qwc.31 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:40 -0700 (PDT) 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=R+GYZgymORJZ+hohecb04ZJqNpLGbi0dMJF6N0fO+yU=; b=UAFjpiX8SCxrjhuOmn2Vou+G45kl0Z0TVwfsG8kMwVTlv/tpHlpDNYRS9dSK1+7hqv xTfNm2l0icBZifHuWkiDgaa98i+vhxtvHAZO261Y1e9slLE2tmIl2rz03e/deXUFrB5t WGKYstxmNXkDjCVMhO35lNRRC1jecAH2aGXug= 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=e9wYCALk+xvJz7Wd8Og0CBgIVw4qPjg8GOiQdbyldgcvYJQ2yK4dVxphLKXZ1s9CdJ PWHzhS9fJF8EdydOLNs+2q8L82xVDzlqKNx960bI59J9faoQDbcLTw79uwbLupBMgvmL O/dYIUsg2xA+yhKkpDr013+rrougSPMpT7R7c= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.9.195 with SMTP id m3mr773671qcm.137.1302803200610; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.238.210 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:46:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:16:40 +0530 Message-ID: From: Ankit Kumar Sharma To: mosbah abdelkader Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016360e3f5cfc11b304a0e48172 Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] Getting active SCTP sockets, their properties and listening on them for outgoing and incoming SCTP traffic X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:46:41 -0000 --0016360e3f5cfc11b304a0e48172 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Have you searched on internet for the same? I am sure you would find many tutorials on this topic. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:05 PM, mosbah abdelkader < mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > > I need to get active SCTP sockets, their properties and listen for SCTP > traffic on my machine directly from the SCTP sockets established (I don't > want to do a network capture directly). How to do that? > > > The sctp implementation doesn't matter (lksctp,...etc): I want just the idea to do that. > > > -- > BR > > > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > --0016360e3f5cfc11b304a0e48172 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Have you searched on internet for the same?

I am sure yo= u would find many tutorials on this topic.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:05 PM, mosbah abdelkader <= ;mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com= > wrote:
Hi


I need = to get active SCTP sockets, their properties and listen for SCTP
traffic= on my machine directly from the SCTP sockets established (I don't
want to do a network capture directly). How to do that?


The sctp implementation doesn't matter (lksctp,...etc): I want = just the idea to do that.


--
BR

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


--0016360e3f5cfc11b304a0e48172-- From cbenson@adax.com Thu Apr 14 11:21:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D39E083C for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:21:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 56GBZPUlwk4P for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:21:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.adax.com (mail1.adax.com [208.201.231.104]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11F69E0794 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:21:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adax (adax [12.0.0.88]) by mail1.adax.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D4D120A45; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by adax (Postfix, from userid 243) id 756428EDE3; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:23:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by adax (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1688EDE2; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:23:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:23:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Benson X-X-Sender: cbenson@adax.adax To: David Laight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: bidulock@openss7.org, mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:21:55 -0000 David, Please ignore my question regarding NOTIFY and SHOULD. I was accidentally viewing a file named rfc3332_bis - an early draft of RFC 4666 instead of the real 3332. (Thanks Andrew B.). However, this difference provides me with the information that probably led to your "rfc3332 doesn't work". Thanks from Chris Benson. On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Chris Benson wrote: >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Chris Benson >> To: David Laight >> Cc: , >> mosbah abdelkader , >> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP >> and 2 SGP >> >> David, >> >> >> rfc3332 doesn't work! >> >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. >> >> Do you mean, even if the SG/SGP fully implements all NOTIFY >> aspects of RFC 3332 Section 4.3.4.5? Or do you mean "it" >> doesn't work if the SHOULD of Paragraph 2 is taken to mean >> "DON'T BOTHER"? >> >> With thanks, from Chris Benson. >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, David Laight wrote: >> >> >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:19:41 +0100 >> >> From: David Laight >> >> To: mosbah abdelkader , >> >> , >> >> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP >> >> and 2 SGP >> >> >> >> > It is not a question of interoperability especially >> >> > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. >> >> >> >> rfc3332 doesn't work! >> >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Sigtran mailing list >> >> Sigtran@ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sigtran mailing list >> Sigtran@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 02:29:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC2CE06E9 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.031 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g2TP5CR-vBLH for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C665BE0693 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so2733672iye.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT) 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=pXRyoRUvwoMUvICb/2IgCtxs8AIKJKdaQLECUTLh4t8=; b=pxgnCVA2G86jlZCQoEz3dakMrb5cIYDtdkiUtZU6DzibELSYR5FShpwHRXTLmklaIS UO7+PcQPawDXuA3Nq7Gma5jYwHKMXEGuWCuf51rKYcL68kGGkJxkCyqP8r8RB/UNVGUG RRhGTBTOS4E74ZoxC8TPHEENdl4lt0R+8sEyc= 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=fr1j9htueICG+XM74ZjTmumyN/oALgUszlq59iQdLxB6li+2iaHlVp7NJpEdxITUuZ rBpHZFln0F6dRnL5OuHZhLqFhK3aVRdqKMuDDKtRhoBMk+bMJ2xW8C/5JyqQUIfLHUtr lxmRGQjVej4l1zGXb1OF7UdNzuMQtHgCORhCM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.17.4 with SMTP id q4mr1532458iba.81.1302859752316; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:29:12 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: Chris Benson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000325574d82baa21c04a0f1ac59 Cc: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP and 2 SGP X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:29:14 -0000 --000325574d82baa21c04a0f1ac59 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Chris, Could you please clarify what you have understood :). Thks. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Chris Benson wrote: > David, > > Please ignore my question regarding NOTIFY and SHOULD. > I was accidentally viewing a file named rfc3332_bis > - an early draft of RFC 4666 instead of the real 3332. > (Thanks Andrew B.). > > However, this difference provides me with the information > that probably led to your "rfc3332 doesn't work". > > Thanks from Chris Benson. > > On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Chris Benson wrote: > > >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) > >> From: Chris Benson > >> To: David Laight > >> Cc: , > >> mosbah abdelkader , < > sigtran@ietf.org> > >> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup between > 1 ASP > >> and 2 SGP > >> > >> David, > >> > >> >> rfc3332 doesn't work! > >> >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. > >> > >> Do you mean, even if the SG/SGP fully implements all NOTIFY > >> aspects of RFC 3332 Section 4.3.4.5? Or do you mean "it" > >> doesn't work if the SHOULD of Paragraph 2 is taken to mean > >> "DON'T BOTHER"? > >> > >> With thanks, from Chris Benson. > >> > >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, David Laight wrote: > >> > >> >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:19:41 +0100 > >> >> From: David Laight > >> >> To: mosbah abdelkader , > >> >> , > >> >> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA association setup > between 1 ASP > >> >> and 2 SGP > >> >> > >> >> > It is not a question of interoperability especially > >> >> > if the 2 ends are using rfc3332. > >> >> > >> >> rfc3332 doesn't work! > >> >> A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Sigtran mailing list > >> >> Sigtran@ietf.org > >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sigtran mailing list > >> Sigtran@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > >> > --000325574d82baa21c04a0f1ac59 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chris,


Could you please clarify what you have u= nderstood :).

Thks.

On Thu, Apr 14= , 2011 at 7:23 PM, Chris Benson <cbenson@adax.com> wrote:
David,

Please ignore my question regarding NOTIFY and SHOULD.
I was accidentally viewing a file named rfc3332_bis
- an early draft of RFC 4666 instead of the real 3332.
(Thanks Andrew B.).

However, this difference provides me with the information
that probably led to your "rfc3332 doesn't work".

Thanks from Chris Benson.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Chris Benson wrote:

>> =A0Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
>> =A0From: Chris Benson <cben= son@adax.com>
>> =A0To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
>> =A0Cc: =A0<bidulock@ope= nss7.org>,
>> =A0 =A0 =A0mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com>, =A0<sigtran@ietf.org>
>> =A0Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A ques= tion about M3UA association setup between 1 ASP
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 and 2 SGP
>>
>> =A0David,
>>
>> =A0>> =A0rfc3332 doesn't work!
>> =A0>> =A0A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state.<= br> >>
>> =A0Do you mean, even if the SG/SGP fully implements all NOTIFY
>> =A0aspects of RFC 3332 Section 4.3.4.5? =A0Or do you mean "it= "
>> =A0doesn't work if the SHOULD of Paragraph 2 is taken to mean<= br> >> =A0"DON'T BOTHER"?
>>
>> =A0With thanks, from Chris Benson.
>>
>> =A0On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, David Laight wrote:
>>
>> =A0>> =A0Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:19:41 +0100
>> =A0>> =A0From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
>> =A0>> =A0To: mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com>,
>> =A0>> =A0 =A0 =A0<bidulock@openss7.org>, =A0<s= igtran@ietf.org>
>> =A0>> =A0Subject: Re: [Sigtran] A question about M3UA associ= ation setup between 1 ASP
>> =A0>> =A0 =A0 =A0 and 2 SGP
>> =A0>>
>> =A0>> =A0> It is not a question of interoperability espec= ially
>> =A0>> =A0> if the 2 ends are using rfc3332.
>> =A0>>
>> =A0>> =A0rfc3332 doesn't work!
>> =A0>> =A0A second loadsharing ASP isn't told the state.<= br> >> =A0>>
>> =A0>>
>> =A0>> =A0_______________________________________________
>> =A0>> =A0Sigtran mailing list
>> =A0>> =A0Sigtran@ietf.or= g
>> =A0>> =A0https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran<= br> >> =A0>>
>> =A0_______________________________________________
>> =A0Sigtran mailing list
>> =A0Sigtran@ietf.org
>> =A0https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
>>

--000325574d82baa21c04a0f1ac59-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 02:42:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F216AE06B9 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.328 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.270, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iqEUvSjnQhjP for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57E35E0664 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so2742723iye.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=0ZJFaF+H8lst7t1HitT5S28DAlPzr81etHb8QhwRmNA=; b=UrG7SGUKztqpg+WLOHH2zk04WQKkIoUe7r+JcsBAo8Er42MVL0o4+4YsVeBiwek4K6 AnXmrRFMTe1SPdbKtlsrcbWJjZTV9m4DW04p5iP0G2Rj+aueDlx7NByLHdFMKKHmohMq hxPhhgy297z3JG++OZ2oZkOlh3GLqEmNVdJ3E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=vcLeg450z92FGwNRYMLPnr0nR81tNzEQ2h5rix1DmK19i/vH8D4QG2OSDduvZK5ZaA kp12V9m6jGa32Rgzcioy2Pa0lAzjSWuuV1PZNaOKoMyI/L+nB9lpZ+cJXhez1FXflqY9 YtSutpvvPR/bFGDXD9gnjQaVvfoQLWEvI5H8s= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.196.233 with SMTP id eh41mr1569773ibb.6.1302860542460; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502bb18d3434f04a0f1db1f Subject: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:42:24 -0000 --00504502bb18d3434f04a0f1db1f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup a test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their specifications. It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test specifications. I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for testing. I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. Any other idea or tip is welcome. Thank you. -- BR Abdelkader Mosbah. --00504502bb18d3434f04a0f1db1f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi,


I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup a test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their specifications.

It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test specifications.

I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for testing.

I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN.

Any other idea or tip is welcome.

Thank you.

--
BR
Abdelkader Mosbah.
--00504502bb18d3434f04a0f1db1f-- From Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de Fri Apr 15 03:10:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A5AE0685 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:10:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EJaY2hsWPhKr for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-n.franken.de (drew.ipv6.franken.de [IPv6:2001:638:a02:a001:20e:cff:fe4a:feaa]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B18E067E for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-wlce251168.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de (dhcp-wlce251168.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de [132.252.251.168]) (Authenticated sender: macmic) by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F161C0C0BC4; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:10:49 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Michael_T=FCxen?= In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:10:48 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: mosbah abdelkader X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:10:51 -0000 On Apr 15, 2011, at 11:42 AM, mosbah abdelkader wrote: > Hi, >=20 >=20 > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification = process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup a = test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their = specifications. >=20 > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test = specifications. >=20 > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very = known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for = testing. >=20 > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test = bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, if = possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. >=20 > Any other idea or tip is welcome. ETSI has published some test specifications for SCTP, M2UA and M3UA. On http://sctp.fh-muenster.de you can find implementations of some of the ETSI tests. Best regards Michael >=20 > Thank you. >=20 > -- > BR > Abdelkader Mosbah. > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran From bidulock@openss7.org Fri Apr 15 03:18:44 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC71E0794 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KITa9PRxmaed for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C38AE0685 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3FAIcr8012975; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 04:18:39 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3FAIcnw014036; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 04:18:38 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3FAIciY014035; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 04:18:38 -0600 Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 04:18:38 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: mosbah abdelkader Message-ID: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:18:44 -0000 mosbah, I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or training course. Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite --brian mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22) > Hi, > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup a > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their > specifications. > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test > specifications. > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for > testing. > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. > Any other idea or tip is welcome. > Thank you. > -- > BR > Abdelkader Mosbah. > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 03:18:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB77CE07DD for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.903 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.205, 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 ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HQYG1PlVo-Yi for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A2EE0685 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2762476iwn.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:44 -0700 (PDT) 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=tGJ21giBUOHeHuemFx901NrUoKqCD7hsG/K6OjS9dqI=; b=qifE//VNp2djVqY3DNa0vKtHktBIy1VgOtAf/METp7I3CJMuPu67xJb7tUPX1FmgQc o6/e7rEgPXKnYbSYOucD8opq/XuGIBrIqp2h0gLKl5XDs1AiuEbQkYzwhMvjdxb5VPl6 QbA1p60z7YP8wiG6N0dDJVJnGHC2MzuvjqLgQ= 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=lDEj5Ce697bDa83BbQ/Zqce3LlTQ0iSJRr54XY79Ush9rSuzlm8ydUddkjWy/tumHl oyJJ6rU6+y2oP8Ynhdkk0lwfFm//ELd0TzVV0ca3t8ChGnrZgdZoW/EI2q8bzsXzZnWZ fXBtrPYTAnQEDNGdVR+Bz0VIsaGRVGGC7l0J8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.34.139 with SMTP id l11mr1576033ibd.31.1302862724264; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:18:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:18:44 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Michael_T=FCxen?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=485b3974781edef48004a0f25db8 Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:18:45 -0000 --485b3974781edef48004a0f25db8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok, thank you. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Michael T=FCxen < Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote: > On Apr 15, 2011, at 11:42 AM, mosbah abdelkader wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup a t= est > bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their specifications= . > > > > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test > specifications. > > > > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very kno= wn > companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for testing. > > > > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, if > possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. > > > > Any other idea or tip is welcome. > ETSI has published some test specifications for SCTP, M2UA and M3UA. > On > http://sctp.fh-muenster.de > you can find implementations of some of the ETSI tests. > > Best regards > Michael > > > > Thank you. > > > > -- > > BR > > Abdelkader Mosbah. > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > Sigtran@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > --485b3974781edef48004a0f25db8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok, thank you.

ETSI has published some test specifications for SCTP, M2UA and = M3UA.
On
http://sctp.fh-mue= nster.de
you can find implementations of some of the ETSI tests.

Best regards
Michael
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> BR
> Abdelkader Mosbah.
> _______________________________________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran


--485b3974781edef48004a0f25db8-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 03:27:33 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7A7E068A for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.336 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.336 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.262, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sOFja4GFpM8n for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 875A6E067E for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so2776533iye.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:32 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=BJvPFxdAeqL9wRazzRTh5MsrC1GBF0njEfiL7JVHUpI=; b=YUjLVU2x2FxvBuEJUDSQ4BDs+B6Ku7EOQhwCtOthAyn1K5c0kqXti4xGuwb7I8XSDU fq2sD1gcETR/9ASzRNgSjQw/GnwnVVbB3Q/YkXo79OG7p/hDVh0HDQynT9Q9h9IxM7FT IASG8Co1ASCAnd49+TYO7wDW2BTPEl4haUlDA= 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 :content-type; b=klhUq4tvXSN1K39dSPh93SSRr1aLbjEUbrruV6EzqXT8GPDtLDjmfL8IyMwhAPtic3 LSvsOFUYjst0c7R8x/VPSqcSt5kcAIOVCvcVMtxwflo4knN5Lnj1qN2cuYv4/BEUVdai 9lwHT752DcAdPZyxEk0mGxnRMm+fdZo7ALqR4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.139.5 with SMTP id e5mr2572033icu.136.1302863252100; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:27:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> References: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:27:32 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba1f009455176a04a0f27d9d Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:27:33 -0000 --90e6ba1f009455176a04a0f27d9d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Brian, Please do not give responses if you do not have a response. I am asking for help here from people ready to help. You are not required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the mailing list!!!!!!! On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > mosbah, > > I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or > training course. > > Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose > of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect > to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. > > Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite > > --brian > > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22) > > Hi, > > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification > > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup > a > > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their > > specifications. > > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test > > specifications. > > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very > > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference for > > testing. > > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of test > > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, > > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. > > Any other idea or tip is welcome. > > Thank you. > > -- > > BR > > Abdelkader Mosbah. > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > Sigtran@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > bidulock@openss7.org > http://www.openss7.org/ > --90e6ba1f009455176a04a0f27d9d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Brian,

Please do not give responses if you do not h= ave a response.

I am asking for help here from people ready to help.= You are not required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the maili= ng list!!!!!!!


On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian = F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or
training course.

Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose
of doing anyone's job for them. =A0Particularly when they neglect
to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions.

Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dm3ua+conformance+test= +suite

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Fri, = 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22)
> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certifica= tion
> =A0 =A0process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to= setup a
> =A0 =A0test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their=
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from = very
> =A0 =A0known companies in the field that I guess they will be a refere= nce for
> =A0 =A0testing.
> =A0 =A0I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example = of test
> =A0 =A0bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process= . And,
> =A0 =A0if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN.<= br> > =A0 =A0Any other idea or tip is welcome.
> =A0 =A0Thank you.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0BR
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah.

> ________________________= _______________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran


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

--90e6ba1f009455176a04a0f27d9d-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 03:55:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1DBE07E7 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.356 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.356 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.242, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mdrttqbkRceH for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 121ECE06A2 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yxk30 with SMTP id 30so1308893yxk.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:56 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=Yb2EkeiLUdfFjHUjo/8ei7Wjrq3ZyvYUIpsXetXoFYw=; b=b4ILR9wO5eKOHcU/IZqO0xwKft6mpcnMFBsHfNZutkCX6CNKwe0UOvSy/nOfTVB3iX uPQvxgWIXCVzDqBfKWbgMfHwTwwTpkUlKgyIl3Nv3JfcvDPYiUsZS62io2+NUSchLCY5 isl9gV00y+dKctdKMue8GuNeAIt3oLYzk+T7A= 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 :content-type; b=oY1QBYCOcMCPWRjkpA4Fu82vb7h0+H1rASZgOEgmpVsYKyAlxtvRCHpFUCXdAXZ7nS EVvI1MeaStWc89/NdnM6V0NUSwZ9lfvJBQHaY7od3FXgP/fEx4CR5FGem0swtwocM7iZ Pho3+k+53OOsOVnxuGicVC5rlCz0i3j7Zh1cQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.43.44.6 with SMTP id ue6mr2510268icb.69.1302864956519; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:55:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:55:56 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: bidulock@openss7.org, sigtran@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec52999dfec75ba04a0f2e211 Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:55:58 -0000 --bcaec52999dfec75ba04a0f2e211 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Brian, I suggest you correct the thousands of errors and bugs in your *"said" open source project **OpenSS7* instead of wasting time giving bad responses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!!! On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abdelkader < mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: > Brian, > > Please do not give responses if you do not have a response. > > I am asking for help here from people ready to help. You are not required > to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the mailing list!!!!!!! > > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock < > bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > >> mosbah, >> >> I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or >> training course. >> >> Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose >> of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect >> to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. >> >> Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite >> >> --brian >> >> mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22) >> > Hi, >> > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification >> > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to setup >> a >> > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their >> > specifications. >> > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test >> > specifications. >> > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very >> > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference >> for >> > testing. >> > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of >> test >> > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. And, >> > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. >> > Any other idea or tip is welcome. >> > Thank you. >> > -- >> > BR >> > Abdelkader Mosbah. >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Sigtran mailing list >> > Sigtran@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> >> >> -- >> Brian F. G. Bidulock >> bidulock@openss7.org >> http://www.openss7.org/ >> > > --bcaec52999dfec75ba04a0f2e211 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Brian,

I suggest you correct the thousands of error= s and bugs in your "said" open source project OpenSS7 instead of wasting time giving bad responses and worst suggestions in th= e mailing list !!!!

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abd= elkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,

Please do not give responses if you do not h= ave a response.

I am asking for help here from people ready to help.= You are not required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the maili= ng list!!!!!!!



On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian = F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or
training course.

Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose
of doing anyone's job for them. =A0Particularly when they neglect
to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions.

Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dm3ua+conformance+test= +suite

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Fri, = 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22)
> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certifica= tion
> =A0 =A0process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to= setup a
> =A0 =A0test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their=
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from = very
> =A0 =A0known companies in the field that I guess they will be a refere= nce for
> =A0 =A0testing.
> =A0 =A0I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example = of test
> =A0 =A0bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process= . And,
> =A0 =A0if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN.<= br> > =A0 =A0Any other idea or tip is welcome.
> =A0 =A0Thank you.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0BR
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah.

> _____________________________________= __________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran


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


--bcaec52999dfec75ba04a0f2e211-- From bidulock@openss7.org Fri Apr 15 05:53:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974DCE07F3 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 05:53:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.374 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.374 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DAHPxHq5uxkT for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 05:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B16E06E5 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 05:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3FCr6AT015543; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 06:53:06 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3FCr6xq016632; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 06:53:06 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3FCr6KO016631; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 06:53:06 -0600 Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 06:53:06 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: mosbah abdelkader Message-ID: <20110415125306.GA16148@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: mosbah abdelkader , sigtran@ietf.org References: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:53:11 -0000 mosbah, IETF mailing lists are for conducting IETF business and WG mailing lists are for technical discussions relating to the WG work items. If you have a question concerning a SIGTRAN WG document, please pose it. Your most recent posts, however, are not only OT they are abusive. --brian mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:55:56) > Brian, > I suggest you correct the thousands of errors and bugs in your "said" > open source project OpenSS7 instead of wasting time giving bad > responses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!!! > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abdelkader > <[1]mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: > > Brian, > Please do not give responses if you do not have a response. > I am asking for help here from people ready to help. You are not > required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the mailing > list!!!!!!! > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock > <[2]bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: > > mosbah, > I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or > training course. > Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose > of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect > to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. > Try: [3]http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite > --brian > mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 > 10:42:22) > > > Hi, > > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol > certification > > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to > setup a > > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their > > specifications. > > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test > > specifications. > > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from > very > > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference > for > > testing. > > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of > test > > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. > And, > > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. > > Any other idea or tip is welcome. > > Thank you. > > -- > > BR > > Abdelkader Mosbah. > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sigtran mailing list > > [4]Sigtran@ietf.org > > [5]https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > -- > Brian F. G. Bidulock > [6]bidulock@openss7.org > [7]http://www.openss7.org/ > > References > > 1. mailto:mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com > 2. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > 3. http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite > 4. mailto:Sigtran@ietf.org > 5. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > 6. mailto:bidulock@openss7.org > 7. http://www.openss7.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ From ankisharma@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 07:24:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4EFE066A for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T+GvqL0G0qFO for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74FDE0670 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so1927381qwc.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) 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=IYm2uzer+L2o55uZb7EhPzGh/CO+j342XLh8A9x9x0s=; b=Aqw/iTXyfm170GjU1OAWYiNVteLwojcYyJRtUwninlAT43h1/psHYXuEwq0d3+dE7w teJoNU951j1bQ5nBqT7ytdaMfQADpHVXFkO6Jd3v2s/e4A7CpToUUxwLTlOk36Y/tr3D eufDoz+36hiI/ZeJ6kRqfW8bwNuTlyv2Ytb+E= 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=GIusv7Us1dJmUKLRVpvMNMKpdLz86lUB76dbVESDmhnVDs4WL47ha4QsdJvM2F0NFd rVrQHSg1Bg6PwzzwG0X1LnuFfWOHHPyuZ9jQAsz+rg6n6OoTzJbWYOC2H17bxgqdIjeK SJvoEDjM43HPw/qqc46tL4QIlojf7CH0YH0Uk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.9.195 with SMTP id m3mr1502360qcm.137.1302877493478; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.238.210 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 19:54:53 +0530 Message-ID: From: Ankit Kumar Sharma To: mosbah abdelkader Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016360e3f5c2f44f204a0f5ce7d Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:24:58 -0000 --0016360e3f5c2f44f204a0f5ce7d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Mosbah, I agree with Brian, and I also request you to use google first and then post your queries here. It was indeed a sound advice, and it would definitely save your time. There is no need to get personal here. Brian is an active and well respected contributor of this mailing list. No one is forcing you to use OpenSS7, and if you really hate it then go for some other commercial version. But, do not insult people who have invested their time and energy in this project. No software in this world is bug free. isnt it? Regards On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, mosbah abdelkader < mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote > Brian, > > I suggest you correct the thousands of errors and bugs in your *"said" > open source project **OpenSS7* instead of wasting time giving bad > responses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!!! > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abdelkader < > mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Brian, >> >> Please do not give responses if you do not have a response. >> >> I am asking for help here from people ready to help. You are not required >> to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the mailing list!!!!!!! >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock < >> bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: >> >>> mosbah, >>> >>> I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or >>> training course. >>> >>> Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose >>> of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect >>> to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. >>> >>> Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite >>> >>> --brian >>> >>> mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 >>> 10:42:22) >>> > Hi, >>> > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification >>> > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to >>> setup a >>> > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their >>> > specifications. >>> > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test >>> > specifications. >>> > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very >>> > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference >>> for >>> > testing. >>> > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of >>> test >>> > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. >>> And, >>> > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. >>> > Any other idea or tip is welcome. >>> > Thank you. >>> > -- >>> > BR >>> > Abdelkader Mosbah. >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Sigtran mailing list >>> > Sigtran@ietf.org >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Brian F. G. Bidulock >>> bidulock@openss7.org >>> http://www.openss7.org/ >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran > > --0016360e3f5c2f44f204a0f5ce7d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mosbah,

I agree with Brian, and I also request you to us= e google first and then post your queries here. It was indeed a sound advic= e, and it would definitely save your time.

There i= s no need to get personal here.=A0Brian is an active and well respected con= tributor of this mailing list.=A0No one is forcing you to use OpenSS7, and = if you really hate it then go for some other commercial version. But, do no= t insult people who have invested their time and energy in this project. No= software in this world is bug free. isnt it?=A0

Regards

On Fri= , Apr 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com>= wrote
Brian,

I suggest yo= u correct the thousands of errors and bugs in your "said" open= source project OpenSS7 instead of wasting time giving bad respo= nses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!!!


On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abd= elkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,

Please do not give responses if you do not h= ave a response.

I am asking for help here from people ready to help.= You are not required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the maili= ng list!!!!!!!



On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian = F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or
training course.

Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose
of doing anyone's job for them. =A0Particularly when they neglect
to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions.

Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dm3ua+conformance+test= +suite

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Fri, = 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22)
> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certifica= tion
> =A0 =A0process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to= setup a
> =A0 =A0test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their=
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from = very
> =A0 =A0known companies in the field that I guess they will be a refere= nce for
> =A0 =A0testing.
> =A0 =A0I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example = of test
> =A0 =A0bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process= . And,
> =A0 =A0if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN.<= br> > =A0 =A0Any other idea or tip is welcome.
> =A0 =A0Thank you.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0BR
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah.

> _____________________________________= __________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran


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



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


--0016360e3f5c2f44f204a0f5ce7d-- From mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com Fri Apr 15 07:27:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8856E0842 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ld1wQijhFUlo for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F8EDE083D for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so2959316iye.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:38 -0700 (PDT) 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=Hv5A/k8L6+vfZjGQJiLkUHMFHxUQ08eFMk2y4sZaZy4=; b=Tal2/XgDDONNxSwfKA5+cV2vxRCefW1v5RMrmDKBfiyxqFkO24h2dozzTv9buuP3jy OpbzUykwZIeP2EB5FeUBA7IKsHSEtweVfLyPZYxXt/BPBYk/VL5yZiFLqWsuqeVojMYI XKArMORgn96Duc5n22K4A7BXXCc2XbHwkYE/A= 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=UPCWDIUXJwaIpqQPXCYZdb1AgRpGlzC2zgTni1L5lhph215HKuJwdTo5tPPGLShp3F bh4Qz6YTxO+LUC6pxlPrKKrvJGxKIEBuNE2XbLhrIqGZg/OiS8NgHNzCMR6/yDiy7lme FdWk/z1g/FB7c/10pv7bQEi8zI4nCc31SqxjA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.1.18 with SMTP id 18mr2906882ice.203.1302877657972; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.12.133 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:27:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110415101838.GA13631@openss7.org> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:27:37 +0100 Message-ID: From: mosbah abdelkader To: Ankit Kumar Sharma Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba181860fd431504a0f5d73f Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] SIGTRAN test bed setup X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:27:42 -0000 --90e6ba181860fd431504a0f5d73f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ok, you are right. I am sorry. Thank you and thanks to Brian who also gave respected advices :) Sorry again. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Ankit Kumar Sharma wrote: > Mosbah, > > I agree with Brian, and I also request you to use google first and then > post your queries here. It was indeed a sound advice, and it would > definitely save your time. > > There is no need to get personal here. Brian is an active and well > respected contributor of this mailing list. No one is forcing you to use > OpenSS7, and if you really hate it then go for some other commercial > version. But, do not insult people who have invested their time and energy > in this project. No software in this world is bug free. isnt it? > > Regards > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, mosbah abdelkader < > mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote > > Brian, >> >> I suggest you correct the thousands of errors and bugs in your *"said" >> open source project **OpenSS7* instead of wasting time giving bad >> responses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!!! >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abdelkader < >> mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Brian, >>> >>> Please do not give responses if you do not have a response. >>> >>> I am asking for help here from people ready to help. You are not required >>> to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the mailing list!!!!!!! >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock < >>> bidulock@openss7.org> wrote: >>> >>>> mosbah, >>>> >>>> I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or >>>> training course. >>>> >>>> Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose >>>> of doing anyone's job for them. Particularly when they neglect >>>> to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions. >>>> >>>> Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=m3ua+conformance+test+suite >>>> >>>> --brian >>>> >>>> mosbah abdelkader wrote: (Fri, 15 Apr 2011 >>>> 10:42:22) >>>> > Hi, >>>> > I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certification >>>> > process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to >>>> setup a >>>> > test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their >>>> > specifications. >>>> > It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test >>>> > specifications. >>>> > I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from very >>>> > known companies in the field that I guess they will be a reference >>>> for >>>> > testing. >>>> > I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example of >>>> test >>>> > bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process. >>>> And, >>>> > if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN. >>>> > Any other idea or tip is welcome. >>>> > Thank you. >>>> > -- >>>> > BR >>>> > Abdelkader Mosbah. >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Sigtran mailing list >>>> > Sigtran@ietf.org >>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Brian F. G. Bidulock >>>> bidulock@openss7.org >>>> http://www.openss7.org/ >>>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sigtran mailing list >> Sigtran@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran >> >> > --90e6ba181860fd431504a0f5d73f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok, you are right. I am sorry.

Thank you and thanks= to Brian who also gave respected advices :)

Sorry again.

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Ankit Kumar Sharma= <ankisharma@g= mail.com> wrote:
Mosbah,

<= /div>
I agree with Brian, and I also request you to use google first an= d then post your queries here. It was indeed a sound advice, and it would d= efinitely save your time.

There is no need to get personal here.=A0Brian is an ac= tive and well respected contributor of this mailing list.=A0No one is forci= ng you to use OpenSS7, and if you really hate it then go for some other com= mercial version. But, do not insult people who have invested their time and= energy in this project. No software in this world is bug free. isnt it?=A0=

Regards

On Fri= , Apr 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, mosbah abdelkader <mosbah.abdelkader= @gmail.com> wrote

= Brian,

I suggest you correct the thousands of errors and bugs in you= r "said" open source project OpenSS7 instead of was= ting time giving bad responses and worst suggestions in the mailing list !!= !!


On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:27 AM, mosbah abd= elkader <mosbah.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,

Please do not give responses if you do not h= ave a response.

I am asking for help here from people ready to help.= You are not required to give responses nor to speak on behalf of the maili= ng list!!!!!!!



On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Brian = F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@openss7.org> wrote:
mosbah,

I suggest you hire a consultant, protocol test company, or
training course.

Either way, this WG mailing list does not exist for the purpose
of doing anyone's job for them. =A0Particularly when they neglect
to even use a search engine to answer obvious questions.

Try: http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dm3ua+conformance+test= +suite

--brian

mosbah abdelkader wrote: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (Fri, = 15 Apr 2011 10:42:22)
> =A0 =A0Hi,
> =A0 =A0I am relatively new to SIGTRAN/SS7 field and protocol certifica= tion
> =A0 =A0process. And I am getting involved in a project where I have to= setup a
> =A0 =A0test bed for testing some SIGTRAN implementations against their=
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0It appears for me that not all the SIGTRAN specs have test
> =A0 =A0specifications.
> =A0 =A0I have access to 2 commercial SS7/SIGTRAN implementations from = very
> =A0 =A0known companies in the field that I guess they will be a refere= nce for
> =A0 =A0testing.
> =A0 =A0I need some help or doc that demonstrates at least one example = of test
> =A0 =A0bed setup and the protocol implementation certification process= . And,
> =A0 =A0if possible, provide test specification documents for SIGTRAN.<= br> > =A0 =A0Any other idea or tip is welcome.
> =A0 =A0Thank you.
> =A0 =A0--
> =A0 =A0BR
> =A0 =A0Abdelkader Mosbah.

> _____________________________________= __________
> Sigtran mailing list
> Sigtran@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran


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



_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran



--90e6ba181860fd431504a0f5d73f-- From santhana@huawei.com Mon Apr 18 02:37:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA0FE0682 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 02:37:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.109 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RWUOpqm0t8xL for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 02:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E471E075B for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 02:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU00HBLDB66F@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:35:30 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU00JP1DB6QD@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:35:30 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml06-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJU008QEDB4WJ@szxml06-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:35:30 +0800 (CST) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:49:18 +0530 From: Santhana To: sigtran@ietf.org Message-id: Organization: Htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_9rPcq2xNmRD3h/mrLQbyNA)" Thread-index: Acv9qa9+R63ybLY+SqajZOKQPQz6Mw== Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:37:23 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_9rPcq2xNmRD3h/mrLQbyNA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi all The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ? Regards +Santhana --Boundary_(ID_9rPcq2xNmRD3h/mrLQbyNA) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi all

            The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ?

 

Regards

+Santhana

--Boundary_(ID_9rPcq2xNmRD3h/mrLQbyNA)-- From barryn@adax.com Mon Apr 18 06:09:08 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8522E07CE for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:09:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1nI2j+GtICiT for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.adax.com (mail1.adax.com [208.201.231.104]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75006E07CB for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (static-151-204-189-187.cmdnnj.east.verizon.net [151.204.189.187]) by mail1.adax.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB5371209AF for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:09:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5440A2038D for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:09:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net Received: from static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cKnxASOGMkHL for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:08:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bn001320 (bn001320.mtl-nj.adax [192.168.1.61]) by static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (Postfix) with SMTP id F10FD20388 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:08:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "Barry Nagelberg" To: "SIGTRAN Mailing List" Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:09:07 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1933 Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:09:09 -0000 Santhana, It depends. This is why the Routing Context parameter is classified as "Conditional" for all of the Signalling Network Management (SSNM) Messages. There are several cases, the first two of which are enumerated in the description of the Routing Context parameter, at the top of page 38 of the RFC: A. Where a Routing Key has not been coordinated between the SGP and ASP, sending of Routing Context is not required. B. Where multiple Routing Keys and Routing Contexts are used across a common association, the Routing Context(s) MUST be sent to identify the concerned traffic flows for which the DUNA message applies, ... There is a third case, which is related to case A: C. Where exactly one Routing Key has been configured for a given association, sending of Routing Context is not required on that association. Case C is documented in Section 4.3.4.3. "ASP Active Procedures": In the case where an ASP Active message does not contain a Routing Context parameter, the receiver must know, via configuration data, which Application Server(s) the ASP is a member. Barry Nagelberg Adax, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Santhana Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:19 AM To: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Hi all The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ? Regards +Santhana From santhana@huawei.com Mon Apr 18 06:25:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DF4E070F for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.554 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.445, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_45=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ls3BeSFTP8Me for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07715E0664 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU005D8NVZCY@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LJU008EINVZ84@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL2NC ([10.18.1.32]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LJU00EZONVYUC@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for sigtran@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:23:59 +0800 (CST) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:37:48 +0530 From: Santhana In-reply-to: To: 'Barry Nagelberg' , 'SIGTRAN Mailing List' Message-id: <2B5B5A08294D444BAD72ADDDB9471223@china.huawei.com> Organization: Htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4657 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: Acv9yeCuSAm+zNY+S4SQQj7fqLG76gAAReUg References: Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: santhana@huawei.com List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:25:31 -0000 Hi Barry Thanks for ur reply. I should have been more specific in my first mail. In the RC mandatory case(where multiple RKs and RCs are coordinated), in DAUD message which RC should be sent 1) or 2) below. 1) list of RCs corresponding(to identify the traffic flow of) to the Destinations being Audited 2) RC of the Destination that is sending the DAUD message Regards +Santhana -----Original Message----- From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Barry Nagelberg Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 6:39 PM To: SIGTRAN Mailing List Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Santhana, It depends. This is why the Routing Context parameter is classified as "Conditional" for all of the Signalling Network Management (SSNM) Messages. There are several cases, the first two of which are enumerated in the description of the Routing Context parameter, at the top of page 38 of the RFC: A. Where a Routing Key has not been coordinated between the SGP and ASP, sending of Routing Context is not required. B. Where multiple Routing Keys and Routing Contexts are used across a common association, the Routing Context(s) MUST be sent to identify the concerned traffic flows for which the DUNA message applies, ... There is a third case, which is related to case A: C. Where exactly one Routing Key has been configured for a given association, sending of Routing Context is not required on that association. Case C is documented in Section 4.3.4.3. "ASP Active Procedures": In the case where an ASP Active message does not contain a Routing Context parameter, the receiver must know, via configuration data, which Application Server(s) the ASP is a member. Barry Nagelberg Adax, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Santhana Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:19 AM To: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Hi all The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ? Regards +Santhana _______________________________________________ Sigtran mailing list Sigtran@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran From barryn@adax.com Mon Apr 18 06:35:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: sigtran@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B559E070E for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:35:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_45=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2rIUr1sfkXnM for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.adax.com (mail1.adax.com [208.201.231.104]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39413E0664 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (static-151-204-189-187.cmdnnj.east.verizon.net [151.204.189.187]) by mail1.adax.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6552D1209B2 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08A32038D for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:35:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net Received: from static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CKQd5Dycb-jT for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:35:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bn001320 (bn001320.mtl-nj.adax [192.168.1.61]) by static-151-204-189-187.pskn.east.verizon.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 78BC42038C for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:35:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Barry Nagelberg" To: "'SIGTRAN Mailing List'" Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:35:17 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <2B5B5A08294D444BAD72ADDDB9471223@china.huawei.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1933 Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:35:16 -0000 Santhana, The RC sent in the DAUD messages identifies which AS in the ASP is sending the audit about the SS7 destination point. The SS7 destination point being audited is identified by the "Affected Point Code" parameter of the DAUD msg, not by the RC. Barry Nagelberg Adax, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Santhana [mailto:santhana@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 9:08 AM To: 'Barry Nagelberg'; 'SIGTRAN Mailing List' Subject: RE: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Hi Barry Thanks for ur reply. I should have been more specific in my first mail. In the RC mandatory case(where multiple RKs and RCs are coordinated), in DAUD message which RC should be sent 1) or 2) below. 1) list of RCs corresponding(to identify the traffic flow of) to the Destinations being Audited 2) RC of the Destination that is sending the DAUD message Regards +Santhana -----Original Message----- From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Barry Nagelberg Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 6:39 PM To: SIGTRAN Mailing List Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Santhana, It depends. This is why the Routing Context parameter is classified as "Conditional" for all of the Signalling Network Management (SSNM) Messages. There are several cases, the first two of which are enumerated in the description of the Routing Context parameter, at the top of page 38 of the RFC: A. Where a Routing Key has not been coordinated between the SGP and ASP, sending of Routing Context is not required. B. Where multiple Routing Keys and Routing Contexts are used across a common association, the Routing Context(s) MUST be sent to identify the concerned traffic flows for which the DUNA message applies, ... There is a third case, which is related to case A: C. Where exactly one Routing Key has been configured for a given association, sending of Routing Context is not required on that association. Case C is documented in Section 4.3.4.3. "ASP Active Procedures": In the case where an ASP Active message does not contain a Routing Context parameter, the receiver must know, via configuration data, which Application Server(s) the ASP is a member. Barry Nagelberg Adax, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Santhana Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:19 AM To: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Hi all The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ? Regards +Santhana _______________________________________________ Sigtran mailing list Sigtran@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran From David.Laight@ACULAB.COM Wed Apr 27 01:08:11 2011 Return-Path: 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 7A584E06D8 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:08:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.898 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BAD_LINEBREAK=0.5, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4hqr4Qzmpklo for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.aculab.com (mx0.aculab.com [213.249.233.131]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BB59E06D1 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:08:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 1867 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2011 08:08:07 -0000 Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by mx0.aculab.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 2011 08:08:07 -0000 Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.aculab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 32366-01 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:08:05 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 1842 invoked by uid 599); 27 Apr 2011 08:08:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO saturn3.Aculab.com) (10.202.163.5) by mx0.aculab.com (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:08:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC04B2.21BFC922" Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:07:20 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC Thread-Index: Acv9qa9+R63ybLY+SqajZOKQPQz6MwHBlBtw From: "David Laight" To: , X-Virus-Scanned: by iCritical at mx0.aculab.com Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:08:11 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC04B2.21BFC922 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My interpretation is that the requirement for the RC depends on the actual implemenation of the SGP and the ASP. This has all the appearances of a fudge to make two existing implementations meet the standard. =20 The SGP has the information available to respond to a DUNA without looking at an RC in the message - even when there are multiple RC. (Similarly both the SGP and ASP can process data messages without needing an RC in the message.) =20 So the requirement for an RC in DAUD by the SGP isn't absolute. =20 Similar interpretations apply to the ASP - which may expect any RC be sent back in the DUNA/DAVA response. =20 David ________________________________ From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Santhana Sent: 18 April 2011 10:19 To: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC =09 =09 Hi all The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ?=20 =20 Regards +Santhana =0D=0A =0D= ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC04B2.21BFC922 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My interpretation is that the requirement for = the RC=20 depends on the actual implemenation
of the SGP and the ASP.
This has all the appearances of a fudge to make = two=20 existing implementations
meet the standard.
 
The SGP has the information available to = respond to a DUNA=20 without looking
at an RC in the message - even when there are = multiple=20 RC.
(Similarly both the SGP and ASP can process = data messages=20 without needing
an RC in the message.)
 
So the requirement for an RC in DAUD by = the SGP isn't=20 absolute.
 
Similar interpretations apply to the ASP - = which may expect=20 any RC be
sent back in the DUNA/DAVA = response.
 
    David

From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Santhana
Sent:=20 18 April 2011 10:19
To: sigtran@ietf.org
Subject:=20 [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC

Hi=20 all

           = =20 The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA mesg. Now = when an=20 ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, does it need to = include=20 all the associated RCs of the Destinations which it is Auditing ?=20

 

Regards

+Santhana


= =0D=0A
Registered Address Lakeside, Br= amley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 13973= 86 (Wales)
=0D=0A
=0D=0A

P Please consider the environment and d= on't print this e-mail unless you really need to

<= /FONT>

= ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC04B2.21BFC922-- From bidulock@openss7.org Wed Apr 27 03:55:39 2011 Return-Path: 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 DA7B2E06EC for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 03:55:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lvRS+U-PFOxr for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 03:55:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E209E06B0 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 03:55:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3RAsFDL021747; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 04:54:15 -0600 Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p3RAsFNg009586; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 04:54:15 -0600 Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3RAsEvw009585; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 04:54:14 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 04:54:14 -0600 From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" To: David Laight Message-ID: <20110427105414.GA9096@openss7.org> Mail-Followup-To: David Laight , santhana@huawei.com, sigtran@ietf.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: http://www.openss7.org/ Dsn-Notification-To: X-Spam-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: sigtran@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org List-Id: Signaling Transport List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:55:40 -0000 David, There are many instances where an SG would be unable to process a DAUD message without an RC in it. Here are a couple: 1. The SG is an STP that provides GWS, EGWS or BGWS and it is unable to determine whether a destination is prohibited or allowed to an AS without knowing which AS is asking. 2. The SG supports multiple networks (e.g. national and international) and cannot know to which network the destinations in the DAUD apply without knowing the network (indicated by RC) of the requesting AS. 3. The SG provides prioritized routes based on originator and the congestion status is different for different AS (because they use different routes). Therefore, the SG does not know what SCON status to report unless the requesting AS is identified by RC. 4. Two SG are configured as multiple SG as STP in an SS7 network supporting "restricted" destinations. Because the ASP TM status can be different for different AS, the restricted status depends upon the AS requesting the status. I could go on... Because the ASP should not need to know all of the logic in the SG and in particular when an RC would be absolutely required or not, it is relieved of this a priori knowledge burden by the requirement that it always simply identify the AS in the DAUD. Therefore, where an ASP is configured for multiple AS, it is required to provide the RC. --brian David Laight wrote: (Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:07:20) > My interpretation is that the requirement for the RC depends on the > actual implemenation > > of the SGP and the ASP. > > This has all the appearances of a fudge to make two existing > implementations > > meet the standard. > > > > The SGP has the information available to respond to a DUNA without > looking > > at an RC in the message - even when there are multiple RC. > > (Similarly both the SGP and ASP can process data messages without > needing > > an RC in the message.) > > > > So the requirement for an RC in DAUD by the SGP isn't absolute. > > > > Similar interpretations apply to the ASP - which may expect any RC be > > sent back in the DUNA/DAVA response. > > > > David > __________________________________________________________________ > > From: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sigtran-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Santhana > Sent: 18 April 2011 10:19 > To: sigtran@ietf.org > Subject: [Sigtran] [M3UA] DAUD message RC > > Hi all > > The RFC4666 says that DAUD message format is same as DUNA > mesg. Now when an ASP send DAUD message to SGP about some Destinations, > does it need to include all the associated RCs of the Destinations > which it is Auditing ? > > > Regards > > +Santhana > > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, > MK1 1PT, UK > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales) > > P Please consider the environment and don't print this e-mail unless > you really need to > _______________________________________________ > Sigtran mailing list > Sigtran@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/