headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 1 Jan 2007 11:14
Favicon

Re: What should be the behavior of ASP, when SCON message received with out congestion indication parameter

Pavan,

Pavan Kumar wrote:                               (Mon, 01 Jan 2007 14:00:25)
> 
>    Hello All ,
> 
>    I  wanted  to  know,  what  should  be  behaviour of ASP when the SCON
>    message is received with out congestion indication parameter.

The ASP can do what it would like and that which it is capable.

I would suggest either delivering the message as an MTP-STATUS indication to
the user or informing local management of the error.

>    Here i am reffering to RFC 4666 & using the ANSI.

RFC 4666 applies to more than just ANSI.

>    According to RFC , it has mentioned that congestion indication is only
>    for  the  ANSI  & national method.Is there any specific reason to keep
>    the congestion indication in the optional parameter. I can't guess the
>    use SCON message without congetion indication.

No need to guess:

     "For MTP congestion methods without multiple congestion levels (e.g.,
      the ITU international method) the parameter is not included."

--brian
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Pavan Kumar | 1 Jan 2007 12:47
Picon

Re: What should be the behavior of ASP, when SCON message received with out congestion indication parameter

Hello Brain ,

Still not clear with the answers provided, can please provide further information.
Also find my inputs inline ..
 
Can you please answer one more question of mine
 
Is there any specific reason to keep the congestion indication in the optional parameter. Why congestion indication can be made mandatory parameter in national networks ?
 
Thanks in advance for the Answer :)
Regards
Pavan
 
On 1/1/07, Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock <at> openss7.org> wrote:
Pavan,

Pavan Kumar wrote:                               (Mon, 01 Jan 2007 14:00:25)
>
>    Hello All ,
>
>    I  wanted  to  know,  what  should  be  behaviour of ASP when the SCON
>    message is received with out congestion indication parameter.

The ASP can do what it would like and that which it is capable.
                             Does it mean there is no specific behavior in the RFC.
                 

 
I would suggest either delivering the message as an MTP-STATUS indication to
the user or informing local management of the error.
 
                                  Why it should inform the Error to local management,As it is compatible to RFC.
As congestion indication is an optional parameter. SCON message have the choice to include/exclude the congestion indication parameter.
 

 
>    Here i am reffering to RFC 4666 & using the ANSI.

RFC 4666 applies to more than just ANSI.
  
     yes I agree
 

>    According to RFC , it has mentioned that congestion indication is only
>    for  the  ANSI  & national method.Is there any specific reason to keep
>    the congestion indication in the optional parameter. I can't guess the
>    use SCON message without congetion indication.

No need to guess:
 
             :)
 

    "For MTP congestion methods without multiple congestion levels (e.g.,
     the ITU international method) the parameter is not included."

--brian

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/

_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
Sigtran <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Brian F. G. Bidulock | 1 Jan 2007 13:30
Favicon

Re: What should be the behavior of ASP, when SCON message received with out congestion indication parameter

Pavan,

Pavan Kumar wrote:                              (Mon, 01 Jan 2007 17:17:55)
> 
>    Is  there any specific reason to keep the congestion indication in the
>    optional  parameter.  Why  congestion indication can be made mandatory
>    parameter in national networks ?

Not all national networks support multiple congestion levels.

>      The ASP can do what it would like and that which it is capable.
> 
> >    Does  it  mean  there  is  no  specific behavior in the RFC.

Yes. 

>      I  would  suggest  either  delivering  the message as an MTP-STATUS
>      indication to the user or informing local management of the error.
> 
> >    Why  it  should inform the Error to local management,As it is
> >    compatible to RFC.

If the network supports multiple congestion levels and does not provide a
congestion indication then it does not follow the RFC and does not provide
sufficient information to generate a national MTP-STATUS indication primitive.

IMO local management the ASP should be informed of this misconfiguration at
the SG as local MTP applications will not behave correctly with regard to
SS7 signalling network congestion.

--brian

--

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock <at> openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane