From javi@trajano.us.es Wed Jul 13 08:35:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A7F11E812B for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:35:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 xBavAbzKk0Xt for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.us.es (mail.us.es [193.147.175.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3067611E8128 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 9296 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2011 17:35:48 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO us.es) (192.168.2.12) by us.es with SMTP; 13 Jul 2011 17:35:48 +0200 Received: (qmail 26444 invoked by uid 507); 13 Jul 2011 15:35:48 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus2 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.08 (clamdscan: 0.97.1/13317. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.033044 secs); 13 Jul 2011 15:35:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO antivirus2) (127.0.0.1) by us.es with SMTP; 13 Jul 2011 15:35:47 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.13 (192.168.1.13) by antivirus2 (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus2); Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:35:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus2) Received: (qmail 20663 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2011 17:35:47 +0200 Received: from trajano.us.es (HELO trajano.telematica) (193.147.162.130) by us.es with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Jul 2011 17:35:47 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (211.Red-79-159-70.staticIP.rima-tde.net [79.159.70.211]) (authenticated bits=0) by trajano.telematica (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id p6DFZkia014917 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:35:47 +0200 Message-ID: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:35:48 +0200 From: Javi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:35:51 -0000 Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one physical and another ephymeral)? Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in a D-channel ISDN. My proposal is to use: + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a notify to the MGC. + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue to manage the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that D-channel. Does H.248.1 allow this? From Christian.Groves@nteczone.com Wed Jul 13 17:42:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB49B11E815A for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:42:34 -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 Yn1zuYIxB5iN for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1742F11E8078 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:42:29 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBALs4Hk520Qew/2dsb2JhbAAMR9QlnzmGOgSjQw Received: from ppp118-209-7-176.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([118.209.7.176]) by ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2011 10:12:28 +0930 Message-ID: <4E1E3B6D.3080300@nteczone.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:42:21 +1000 From: Christian Groves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco ietf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Megaco] Q.3/16 Media Gateway Control Protocols meeting X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:42:34 -0000 Hello all, FYI, for those interested there is a ITU-T Q.3/16 meeting next week on Megaco/H.248. The documents can be found at: http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/avc-site/2009-2012/1107_And/1107_And.html The documents listed under Q.3 are in scope. Regards, Christian From javi@trajano.us.es Thu Jul 14 08:27:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6773221F8B57 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:27:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 WUcp4xIzSyB7 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:27:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.us.es (mail.us.es [193.147.175.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2BB21F8B5B for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 5849 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2011 17:26:52 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO us.es) (192.168.2.12) by us.es with SMTP; 14 Jul 2011 17:26:52 +0200 Received: (qmail 21195 invoked by uid 507); 14 Jul 2011 15:26:51 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus2 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.08 (clamdscan: 0.97.1/13321. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.027596 secs); 14 Jul 2011 15:26:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO antivirus2) (127.0.0.1) by us.es with SMTP; 14 Jul 2011 15:26:51 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.13 (192.168.1.13) by antivirus2 (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus2); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:26:51 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus2) Received: (qmail 24150 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2011 17:26:51 +0200 Received: from trajano.us.es (HELO trajano.telematica) (193.147.162.130) by us.es with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Jul 2011 17:26:51 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (211.Red-79-159-70.staticIP.rima-tde.net [79.159.70.211]) (authenticated bits=0) by trajano.telematica (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id p6EFQo1h004355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:26:51 +0200 Message-ID: <4E1F0ABD.7040301@trajano.us.es> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:26:53 +0200 From: Javi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Megaco] A Media stream in two terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:27:04 -0000 May a same media stream (such as a RTP flow) be add in two terminations (with each termination in a different context)? From albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com Fri Jul 15 04:24:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7458621F854F for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:24:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 iqzKMCOH44Ak for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:24:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91CF921F854A for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6FBOlmj009429 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:24:48 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:24:47 +0200 From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" To: Javi , "megaco@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:24:46 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations Thread-Index: AcxBcpFFe6kI7aOKSkm0hkn5erml0QBbTZ9Q Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> In-Reply-To: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.13 Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:24:56 -0000 > Does H.248.1 allow this? I think so. Guess that following aspect might be also relevant: Does the D-channel carry=20 a) just a single type of frames (e.g. exclusively X.25 traffic); or b) a multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames (e.g., a mix of Q.921 signall= ing, X.25 packet and frame relay traffic). Possible alternatives to the considered ephemeral termination for the "X.25= /D-channel/{16|64}TDM bearer": 1) static configuration, i.e., without any H.248 context, see ETSI TS 18300= 2, =A7 7.3.2.2 -> using an X.25-over-SCTP bearer -> 7.3.2.4.2 IUA/SCTP for X.25 or frame relay traffic 2) H.248 Mux termination use case here: Figure 9 (ex 6)/H.248.1 - Multiplexed termination scenario -= Single-to-multiple terminations -> Circuit 1 =3D D-channel -> StreamID =3D x: p-type (X.25) frames 3) SDP for TDM (old proposal: draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-01.txt) -> single physical termination -> initially 'TDM' -> after detection modified to 'PKT/TDM' The attributes=20 a=3Dnetprof: a=3De2eprof: could be used to "profile the D-channel" for the specific type frames Just some thoughts, Albrecht =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi > Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011 17:36 > To: megaco@ietf.org > Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >=20 > Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one=20 > physical and another ephymeral)? >=20 >=20 > Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in=20 > a D-channel=20 > ISDN. My proposal is to use: >=20 > + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that=20 > termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a=20 > notify to the MGC. >=20 > + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that=20 > packet flow=20 > (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue=20 > to manage=20 > the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that D-channel. >=20 > Does H.248.1 allow this? >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > = From albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com Fri Jul 15 04:29:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E277721F868A for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:29:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] 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 3k2RU90A5s8s for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (smail6.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2097021F8622 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.62]) by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6FBT0hJ013696 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:29:01 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.62]) with mapi; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:29:00 +0200 From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" To: Javi , "megaco@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:28:59 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] A Media stream in two terminations Thread-Index: AcxCQRKjDgAfy33vQ2G03pfuXXjxjwAoNczg Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9828@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <4E1F0ABD.7040301@trajano.us.es> In-Reply-To: <4E1F0ABD.7040301@trajano.us.es> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.84 Subject: Re: [Megaco] A Media stream in two terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:29:04 -0000 The RTP session endpoint is represented by the 3-tuple {SSRC, L4 port, IP@}= for a pure RTP media flow and the 4-tuple with an additional L4 port in ca= se of a parallel RTCP control flow. Javi, could you please indicate the example H.248 signalling (the ADD commands) f= or the two contexts? =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Juli 2011 17:27 > To: megaco@ietf.org > Subject: [Megaco] A Media stream in two terminations >=20 > May a same media stream (such as a RTP flow) be add in two=20 > terminations (with each termination in a different context)? > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > = From javi@trajano.us.es Fri Jul 15 05:25:30 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209A221F8733 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 05:25:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 StFWXb+LJDED for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 05:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.us.es (mail.us.es [193.147.175.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF23321F8726 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 05:25:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 13811 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2011 14:25:27 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO us.es) (192.168.2.11) by us.es with SMTP; 15 Jul 2011 14:25:27 +0200 Received: (qmail 16370 invoked by uid 507); 15 Jul 2011 12:25:23 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus1 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.08 (clamdscan: 0.97.1/13321. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.049508 secs); 15 Jul 2011 12:25:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO antivirus1) (127.0.0.1) by us.es with SMTP; 15 Jul 2011 12:25:23 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.13 (192.168.1.13) by antivirus1 (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus1); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:25:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/403/antivirus1) Received: (qmail 23715 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2011 14:25:23 +0200 Received: from trajano.us.es (HELO trajano.telematica) (193.147.162.130) by us.es with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 15 Jul 2011 14:25:23 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (53.Red-83-60-242.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.60.242.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by trajano.telematica (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id p6FCPKTm022237 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:25:22 +0200 Message-ID: <4E2031B3.9080604@trajano.us.es> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:25:23 +0200 From: Javi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco@ietf.org References: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:25:30 -0000 Thanks Albrecht. I agree. I had also considered your alternatives "1)" and "2)". I don't undesrtand your alternative "3)". If the D-channel carries multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames, you would need a termination for each one, not a single termination. In any case, my main question is: If the D-channel carries multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames, which is the best solution?: a) My first proposal: + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a notify to the MGC. + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x) -the same for frame flows (SAPIs 32-62)- and the physical termination should continue to manage the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that D-channel. b) Your alternative "2)": H.248 Mux termination + Circuit 1 = D-channel + StreamID = x: p-type (X.25) frames + StreamID = x: f-type (FR) frames Thanks, Javi El 15/07/2011 13:24, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) escribió: >> Does H.248.1 allow this? >> > I think so. > Guess that following aspect might be also relevant: > > Does the D-channel carry > a) just a single type of frames (e.g. exclusively X.25 traffic); or > b) a multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames (e.g., a mix of Q.921 signalling, X.25 packet and frame relay traffic). > > Possible alternatives to the considered ephemeral termination for the "X.25/D-channel/{16|64}TDM bearer": > > 1) static configuration, i.e., without any H.248 context, see ETSI TS 183002, § 7.3.2.2 > -> using an X.25-over-SCTP bearer > -> 7.3.2.4.2 IUA/SCTP for X.25 or frame relay traffic > > 2) H.248 Mux termination > use case here: Figure 9 (ex 6)/H.248.1 - Multiplexed termination scenario - Single-to-multiple terminations > -> Circuit 1 = D-channel > -> StreamID = x: p-type (X.25) frames > > 3) SDP for TDM (old proposal: draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-01.txt) > -> single physical termination > -> initially 'TDM' > -> after detection modified to 'PKT/TDM' > > The attributes > a=netprof: > a=e2eprof: > could be used to "profile the D-channel" for the specific type frames > > > Just some thoughts, > Albrecht > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org >> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi >> Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011 17:36 >> To: megaco@ietf.org >> Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >> >> Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one >> physical and another ephymeral)? >> >> >> Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in >> a D-channel >> ISDN. My proposal is to use: >> >> + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that >> termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a >> notify to the MGC. >> >> + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that >> packet flow >> (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue >> to manage >> the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that D-channel. >> >> Does H.248.1 allow this? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Megaco mailing list >> Megaco@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco >> >> > From albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com Sun Jul 17 01:39:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F9FB21F8640 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:39:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.582 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 x8WEfBkhLr16 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail3.alcatel.fr (smail3.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF0621F85CE for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.62]) by smail3.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6H8dNAL020961 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:39:23 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.62]) with mapi; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:39:23 +0200 From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" To: megaco ietf Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:40:01 +0200 Thread-Topic: TD-21 NATTP2P - TCP mode control; RE: [Megaco] Q.3/16 Media Gateway Control Protocols meeting Thread-Index: AcxBvu+wnsfztsGJSfuiJPL6mX62BABObB8g Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E98E9@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <4E1E3B6D.3080300@nteczone.com> In-Reply-To: <4E1E3B6D.3080300@nteczone.com> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.83 Subject: [Megaco] TD-21 NATTP2P - TCP mode control; RE: Q.3/16 Media Gateway Control Protocols meeting X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:39:26 -0000 FYI, we submitted a late document for clarification of RFC 6135 relevance with r= espect to the "SDP-based TCP mode control" proposal: TD-21 Draft H.248.NATTP2P - TCP mode control - SDP "a=3Dsetup" clarificatio= n due to RFC 6135 http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/avc-site/2009-2012/1107_And/TD-21.zip =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Groves > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Juli 2011 02:42 > To: megaco ietf > Subject: [Megaco] Q.3/16 Media Gateway Control Protocols meeting >=20 > Hello all, >=20 > FYI, for those interested there is a ITU-T Q.3/16 meeting=20 > next week on Megaco/H.248. > The documents can be found at: > http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/avc-site/2009-2012/1107_And/1107_And.html >=20 > The documents listed under Q.3 are in scope. >=20 > Regards, Christian > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > = From albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com Mon Jul 18 17:28:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B4521F886C for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:28:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 QE1vV6uDeI3Z for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55EAC21F8794 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.62]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6J0Rvgf013944 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 02:27:57 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB02.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.62]) with mapi; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 02:27:57 +0200 From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" To: megaco ietf Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 02:27:56 +0200 Thread-Topic: to AVD-4117 (AVD-4060) Draft H.248.80 - Aspects of autonomous state transitioning between media configurations Thread-Index: AcxBvu+wnsfztsGJSfuiJPL6mX62BAD17gJA Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9AAB@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <4E1E3B6D.3080300@nteczone.com> In-Reply-To: <4E1E3B6D.3080300@nteczone.com> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.13 Subject: [Megaco] to AVD-4117 (AVD-4060) Draft H.248.80 - Aspects of autonomous state transitioning between media configurations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 00:28:05 -0000 Just a side comment to that topic, which is not explicitly outlined in AVD-= 4117: The concept of a latent configuration (LC) implies a possible switch from a= n actual configuration (AC) to the LC at a later point in time of a "media = session". There are thus two fundamental signalling procedures related to LCs: I) Procedure for declaration, negotiation & committment for LC(s).=20 II) Procedure for switching from an AC to a LC ("state transitioning"). As AVD-4060 concludes: rev. SDP O/A on SIP level defines explicit signallin= g for (II), too. ["But both procedure types are also not clearly separated = ..."] H.248.80: rev. SDP O/A at H.248 interface =3D> I could imagine that a distinction between both procedure type might b= e beneficial =3D> would be in =A7 10.6 Procedures =3D> e.g. =A7 10.6.3.1 on (I) and =A7 10.6.3.2 on (II) aspects ... (and pos= sibly an Appendix for background info concerning MG autonomous state transi= tioning use cases ...) Just some thoughts, Albrecht > -----Original Message----- > From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Groves > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Juli 2011 02:42 > To: megaco ietf > Subject: [Megaco] Q.3/16 Media Gateway Control Protocols meeting >=20 > Hello all, >=20 > FYI, for those interested there is a ITU-T Q.3/16 meeting=20 > next week on Megaco/H.248. > The documents can be found at: > http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/avc-site/2009-2012/1107_And/1107_And.html >=20 > The documents listed under Q.3 are in scope. >=20 > Regards, Christian > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > = From javi@trajano.us.es Wed Jul 27 11:01:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 508C811E80DF for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:01:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 E12i3t86V6kQ for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.us.es (mail.us.es [193.147.175.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A6411E8075 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 18590 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2011 20:01:35 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO us.es) (192.168.2.11) by us.es with SMTP; 27 Jul 2011 20:01:35 +0200 Received: (qmail 6354 invoked by uid 507); 27 Jul 2011 18:01:34 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus1 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.08 (clamdscan: 0.97.1/13367. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.043396 secs); 27 Jul 2011 18:01:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO antivirus1) (127.0.0.1) by us.es with SMTP; 27 Jul 2011 18:01:34 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.13 (192.168.1.13) by antivirus1 (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/406/antivirus1); Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:01:34 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/406/antivirus1) Received: (qmail 2524 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2011 20:01:34 +0200 Received: from trajano.us.es (HELO trajano.telematica) (193.147.162.130) by us.es with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 27 Jul 2011 20:01:34 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (53.Red-83-60-242.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.60.242.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by trajano.telematica (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id p6RI1WqO022150 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:01:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4E305282.2050202@trajano.us.es> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:01:38 +0200 From: Javi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: megaco@ietf.org References: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:01:39 -0000 Thanks Albrecht. I don't undesrtand your alternative "3)". May you clarify it? Also, if the D-channel carries p- or/and f-type frames, what is preferable?: a) An ephemeral termination for each one (at least, for p- anf f-frames). b) An streamID for each one (alternative "2"). Thanks, Javi El 15/07/2011 13:24, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) escribió: >> Does H.248.1 allow this? >> > I think so. > Guess that following aspect might be also relevant: > > Does the D-channel carry > a) just a single type of frames (e.g. exclusively X.25 traffic); or > b) a multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames (e.g., a mix of Q.921 signalling, X.25 packet and frame relay traffic). > > Possible alternatives to the considered ephemeral termination for the "X.25/D-channel/{16|64}TDM bearer": > > 1) static configuration, i.e., without any H.248 context, see ETSI TS 183002, § 7.3.2.2 > -> using an X.25-over-SCTP bearer > -> 7.3.2.4.2 IUA/SCTP for X.25 or frame relay traffic > > 2) H.248 Mux termination > use case here: Figure 9 (ex 6)/H.248.1 - Multiplexed termination scenario - Single-to-multiple terminations > -> Circuit 1 = D-channel > -> StreamID = x: p-type (X.25) frames > > 3) SDP for TDM (old proposal: draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-01.txt) > -> single physical termination > -> initially 'TDM' > -> after detection modified to 'PKT/TDM' > > The attributes > a=netprof: > a=e2eprof: > could be used to "profile the D-channel" for the specific type frames > > > Just some thoughts, > Albrecht > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org >> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi >> Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011 17:36 >> To: megaco@ietf.org >> Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >> >> Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one >> physical and another ephymeral)? >> >> >> Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in >> a D-channel >> ISDN. My proposal is to use: >> >> + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that >> termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a >> notify to the MGC. >> >> + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that >> packet flow >> (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue >> to manage >> the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that D-channel. >> >> Does H.248.1 allow this? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Megaco mailing list >> Megaco@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco >> >> > _______________________________________________ Megaco mailing list Megaco@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco From albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com Thu Jul 28 01:43:49 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E3021F8C56 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:43:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.400, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 pztNLnVUDqgX for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:43:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA88E21F8BBF for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6S8hJ26011401 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:43:47 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:43:38 +0200 From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" To: Javi , "megaco@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:43:37 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations Thread-Index: AcxMhz9QWh2jeQlCT7uhMsrvObZzAgAeTNXQ Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6EA63F@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <4E305282.2050202@trajano.us.es> In-Reply-To: <4E305282.2050202@trajano.us.es> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80 Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 08:43:49 -0000 Javi, I was hesitating to reply because I was wondering myself, whether I firstly= got to know the entire network picture. So far we did consider just a "hal= f-call" model by looking at one termination of the context only. However, I don't guess that the H.248 MG would be the termination point of = the D-channel traffic, right? What would be the 2nd termination? Guess this information could clarify the intended function of the H.248 MG,= e.g., by just "transparent forwarding" of D-channel frames, or any interwo= rking (?), or ...? That information may provides answers=20 to (3): E.g., the termination is initially configured for "TDM awareness", but "una= wareness concerning D-channel traffic type". After detection the terminatio= n may become "aware of specific D-channel type frames" ... (but again, woul= d be dependent on your aimed network use case). [Note: sth similar to IP-IP border gateways, initially configured in media-= agnostic mode, possibly later modified to media aware modes, dependent on .= ..] =20 to (a,b): The question concerning the alternatives of two single-stream-per-terminati= ons versus one dual-stream-per-termination structure could dependent again = on your network use case. (E.g., do you consider a physical or ephemeral te= rmination; any common properties on termination level?) Just some thoughts, Albrecht =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Javi [mailto:javi@trajano.us.es]=20 > Sent: Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2011 20:02 > To: megaco@ietf.org > Cc: Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) > Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >=20 > Thanks Albrecht. >=20 > I don't undesrtand your alternative "3)". May you clarify it? >=20 > Also, if the D-channel carries p- or/and f-type frames, what=20 > is preferable?: >=20 > a) An ephemeral termination for each one (at least, for p-=20 > anf f-frames). >=20 > b) An streamID for each one (alternative "2"). >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Javi >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > El 15/07/2011 13:24, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) escribi=F3: > >> Does H.248.1 allow this? > >> > > I think so. > > Guess that following aspect might be also relevant: > > > > Does the D-channel carry > > a) just a single type of frames (e.g. exclusively X.25 traffic); or > > b) a multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames (e.g., a mix=20 > of Q.921 signalling, X.25 packet and frame relay traffic). > > > > Possible alternatives to the considered ephemeral=20 > termination for the "X.25/D-channel/{16|64}TDM bearer": > > > > 1) static configuration, i.e., without any H.248 context,=20 > see ETSI TS=20 > > 183002, =A7 7.3.2.2 > > -> using an X.25-over-SCTP bearer > > -> 7.3.2.4.2 IUA/SCTP for X.25 or frame relay traffic > > > > 2) H.248 Mux termination > > use case here: Figure 9 (ex 6)/H.248.1 - Multiplexed termination=20 > > scenario - Single-to-multiple terminations > > -> Circuit 1 =3D D-channel > > -> StreamID =3D x: p-type (X.25) frames > > > > 3) SDP for TDM (old proposal: draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-01.txt) > > -> single physical termination > > -> initially 'TDM' > > -> after detection modified to 'PKT/TDM' > > > > The attributes > > a=3Dnetprof: > > a=3De2eprof: > > could be used to "profile the D-channel" for the specific=20 > type frames > > > > > > Just some thoughts, > > Albrecht > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: megaco-bounces@ietf.org > >> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi > >> Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011 17:36 > >> To: megaco@ietf.org > >> Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations > >> > >> Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one=20 > physical=20 > >> and another ephymeral)? > >> > >> > >> Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in a=20 > >> D-channel ISDN. My proposal is to use: > >> > >> + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that > >> termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a=20 > >> notify to the MGC. > >> > >> + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that > >> packet flow > >> (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue to=20 > >> manage the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that=20 > >> D-channel. > >> > >> Does H.248.1 allow this? > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Megaco mailing list > >> Megaco@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco > >> > >> > > >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Megaco mailing list > Megaco@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco >=20 > = From javi@trajano.us.es Fri Jul 29 04:46:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: megaco@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B01221F85C4 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 04:46:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.099, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_SOMA2=2.199, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 fPQ6jZBKV0wQ for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 04:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.us.es (mail.us.es [193.147.175.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CF421F85B9 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 04:46:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 18265 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2011 13:46:31 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO us.es) (192.168.2.12) by us.es with SMTP; 29 Jul 2011 13:46:31 +0200 Received: (qmail 24852 invoked by uid 507); 29 Jul 2011 11:46:20 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus2 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.08 (clamdscan: 0.97.2/13372. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.058062 secs); 29 Jul 2011 11:46:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO antivirus2) (127.0.0.1) by us.es with SMTP; 29 Jul 2011 11:46:20 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.13 (192.168.1.13) by antivirus2 (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/406/antivirus2); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:46:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/406/antivirus2) Received: (qmail 29100 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2011 13:46:20 +0200 Received: from trajano.us.es (HELO trajano.telematica) (193.147.162.130) by us.es with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 29 Jul 2011 13:46:20 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (53.Red-83-60-242.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.60.242.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by trajano.telematica (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id p6TBjpAm009108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:46:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4E329D75.1060801@trajano.us.es> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:45:57 +0200 From: Javi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "megaco@ietf.org" References: <4E1DBB54.1060303@trajano.us.es> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6E9827@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <4E305282.2050202@trajano.us.es> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6EA63F@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F6EA63F@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations X-BeenThere: megaco@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Media Gateway Control List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:46:35 -0000 Albrecht, The entire network picture is similar to "ETSI_ARGW[TS 183 002 v3.3.1]/Clause 7.3.2" or "draft-bouwen-megaco-isdn-data-00": ISDN TE <-> AGW (MG) <-> PH or FH <-> PSPDN where PH "Packet Handler" and FH "Frame Handler" are different equipments (I propose a descomposal architecture for PH: "MGC-PH <-> AGW-PH(SG/MG-PH) <-> PSPDN"; and similar for FH) So, AGW/MG terminates ISDN D-channel, and p-,f- LAPD frames would be sent to PH/FH. The IP termination may be: RawFR, IUA, XOT or PWs (HDLCPW, FRPW, TDMPW). A D-channel packet mode outgoing call may start with a LAPD p-frame (PLP Restart) from ISDN TE, without previous Q.931 signalling. So, a D-channel physical termination is necessary in MG (MG detects that p-frame and sends a MeGaCo notify to MGC; then, MGC sends a SIP INVITE message to PH, signalling the call). So, the D-channel physical termination would be neccessary. The doubt would be: two single-stream-per-terminations (an ephemeral termination per packet or frame connection, apart from the D-channel physical termination) versus one dual-stream-per-termination (only the D-channel physical termination with two StreamIDs). PH and FH are different equipments, and D-channel supports simultaneous packet and frame connections. So, I don't understand alternative "3". Javi El 28/07/2011 10:43, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) escribió: > Javi, > I was hesitating to reply because I was wondering myself, whether I firstly got to know the entire network picture. So far we did consider just a "half-call" model by looking at one termination of the context only. > However, I don't guess that the H.248 MG would be the termination point of the D-channel traffic, right? > > What would be the 2nd termination? > Guess this information could clarify the intended function of the H.248 MG, e.g., by just "transparent forwarding" of D-channel frames, or any interworking (?), or ...? > > That information may provides answers > to (3): > E.g., the termination is initially configured for "TDM awareness", but "unawareness concerning D-channel traffic type". After detection the termination may become "aware of specific D-channel type frames" ... (but again, would be dependent on your aimed network use case). > [Note: sth similar to IP-IP border gateways, initially configured in media-agnostic mode, possibly later modified to media aware modes, dependent on ...] > > to (a,b): > The question concerning the alternatives of two single-stream-per-terminations versus one dual-stream-per-termination structure could dependent again on your network use case. (E.g., do you consider a physical or ephemeral termination; any common properties on termination level?) > > Just some thoughts, Albrecht > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Javi [mailto:javi@trajano.us.es] >> Sent: Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2011 20:02 >> To:megaco@ietf.org >> Cc: Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) >> Subject: Re: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >> >> Thanks Albrecht. >> >> I don't undesrtand your alternative "3)". May you clarify it? >> >> Also, if the D-channel carries p- or/and f-type frames, what >> is preferable?: >> >> a) An ephemeral termination for each one (at least, for p- >> anf f-frames). >> >> b) An streamID for each one (alternative "2"). >> >> Thanks, >> >> Javi >> >> >> >> >> >> El 15/07/2011 13:24, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) escribió: >> >>>> Does H.248.1 allow this? >>>> >>>> >>> I think so. >>> Guess that following aspect might be also relevant: >>> >>> Does the D-channel carry >>> a) just a single type of frames (e.g. exclusively X.25 traffic); or >>> b) a multiplex of s-, p- or/and f-type frames (e.g., a mix >>> >> of Q.921 signalling, X.25 packet and frame relay traffic). >> >>> Possible alternatives to the considered ephemeral >>> >> termination for the "X.25/D-channel/{16|64}TDM bearer": >> >>> 1) static configuration, i.e., without any H.248 context, >>> >> see ETSI TS >> >>> 183002, § 7.3.2.2 >>> -> using an X.25-over-SCTP bearer >>> -> 7.3.2.4.2 IUA/SCTP for X.25 or frame relay traffic >>> >>> 2) H.248 Mux termination >>> use case here: Figure 9 (ex 6)/H.248.1 - Multiplexed termination >>> scenario - Single-to-multiple terminations >>> -> Circuit 1 = D-channel >>> -> StreamID = x: p-type (X.25) frames >>> >>> 3) SDP for TDM (old proposal: draft-taylor-mmusic-sdp-tdm-01.txt) >>> -> single physical termination >>> -> initially 'TDM' >>> -> after detection modified to 'PKT/TDM' >>> >>> The attributes >>> a=netprof: >>> a=e2eprof: >>> could be used to "profile the D-channel" for the specific >>> >> type frames >> >>> Just some thoughts, >>> Albrecht >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From:megaco-bounces@ietf.org >>>> [mailto:megaco-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javi >>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011 17:36 >>>> To:megaco@ietf.org >>>> Subject: [Megaco] Media flow managed by 2 terminations >>>> >>>> Is it possible to manage a same flow by 2 termination (one >>>> >> physical >> >>>> and another ephymeral)? >>>> >>>> >>>> Specifically, I need to manage the packet flows (SAPI 16) in a >>>> D-channel ISDN. My proposal is to use: >>>> >>>> + A physical termination to manage the overall D-channel. When that >>>> termination detects a packet flow (SAPI 16/TEI x), it would send a >>>> notify to the MGC. >>>> >>>> + MGC would create an ephemeral termination to manage that >>>> packet flow >>>> (SAPI 16/TEI x) and the physical termination should continue to >>>> manage the rest of packet flows (with different TEI) in that >>>> D-channel. >>>> >>>> Does H.248.1 allow this? >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Megaco mailing list >>>> Megaco@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Megaco mailing list >> Megaco@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco >> >> >> >