| draft-ietf-sigtran-m2pa-07 Description: Request For Comments
You can download source copies of the file as follows:
Listed below is the contents of file draft-ietf-sigtran-m2pa-07.txt.
Network Working Group Brian Bidulock
INTERNET-DRAFT OpenSS7
Tom George
Alcatel
Ram Dantu
Netrake
Malleswar Kalla
Telcordia
Hanns Juergen Schwarzbauer
Siemens
Ken Morneault
Cisco Systems
Greg Sidebottom
Expires July 2003 January 7, 2003
SS7 MTP2-User Peer-to-Peer Adaptation Layer
M2PA
<draft-ietf-sigtran-m2pa-07.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 or RFC 2026. Internet-Drafts are working
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as 'work in progress'.
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
"1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe),
munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or
ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 1
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Abstract
This Internet Draft defines a protocol supporting the transport of
Signalling System Number 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part (MTP) Level 3
signalling messages over Internet Protocol (IP) using the services of
the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP). This protocol would
be used between SS7 Signalling Points using the MTP Level 3 protocol.
The SS7 Signalling Points may also use standard SS7 links using the
SS7 MTP Level 2 to provide transport of MTP Level 3 signalling
messages.
1. Introduction
1.1. Scope
There is a need for Switched Circuit Network (SCN) signalling
protocol delivery over an IP network. This includes message transfer
between the following:
- a Signalling Gateway (SG) and a Media Gateway Controller (MGC)
[Q.700]
- a SG and an IP Signalling Point (IPSP)
- an IPSP and an IPSP
This could allow for convergence of some signalling and data
networks. SCN signalling nodes would have access to databases and
other devices in the IP network domain that do not use SS7 signalling
links. Likewise, IP telephony applications would have access to SS7
services. There may also be operational cost and performance
advantages when traditional signalling links are replaced by IP
network "connections".
The delivery mechanism described in this document allows for full
MTP3 message handling and network management capabilities between any
two SS7 nodes, communicating over an IP network. An SS7 node equipped
with an IP network connection is called an IP Signalling Point (IPSP).
The IPSPs function as traditional SS7 nodes using the IP network
instead of SS7 links.
The delivery mechanism SHOULD
- Support seamless operation of MTP3 protocol peers over an IP
network connection.
- Support the MTP Level 2 / MTP Level 3 interface boundary.
- Support management of SCTP transport associations and traffic
instead of MTP2 Links.
- Support asynchronous reporting of status changes to management.
1.2. Change History
This section will be removed from the document when the document is
finalized.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 2
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
1.2.1. Changes from Version 0.6 to Version 0.7
- added this section
- reformatted document
- updated references and version number
- updated state transition diagrams
- changed timer names to align with Q.703 [Q.703]
- added proving state and procedure for timer T3
- fixed nits from the mailing list
- adjusted recommended timer values for alignment with Q.703 [Q.703]
- adjusted language on T7 timer to match WG comments
- created postscript diagrams
- spelling corrections
1.3. Terminology
MTP - The Message Transfer Part of the SS7 protocol [Q.701, Q.702,
Q.703, Q.704..T1.111].
MTP2 - MTP Level 2, the MTP signalling link layer.
MTP3 - MTP Level 3, the MTP signalling network layer.
MTP2-User - A protocol that normally uses the services of MTP Level 2.
The only MTP2 user is MTP3. The MTP2 user is equivalent to the
M2PA user.
Signalling End Point (SEP) - A node in an SS7 network that originates
or terminates signalling messages. One example is a central office
switch.
IP Signalling Point (IPSP) - An SS7 Signalling Point with an IP
network connection used for SS7 over IP.
Signalling Gateway (SG) - A signalling agent that receives/sends SCN
native signalling at the edge of the IP network [RFC 2719]. In
this context, an SG is an SS7 Signalling Point that has both an IP
network connection used for SS7 over IP, and a traditional (non-IP)
link to an SS7 network.
Signalling Transfer Point (STP) - A node in an SS7 network that routes
signalling messages based on their destination point code in the
SS7 network.
Association - An association refers to a SCTP association [RFC 2960].
The association provides the transport for MTP3 protocol data units
and M2PA adaptation layer peer messages.
Network Byte Order - Most significant byte first, also known as "Big
Endian". See RFC 791 [RFC 791], Appendix B Data Transmission
Order.
Stream - A stream refers to a SCTP stream [RFC 2960].
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 3
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
1.4. Abbreviations
BSNT - Backward Sequence Number to be Transmitted
FSNC - Forward Sequence Number of last message
accepted by remote level 2
LI - Length Indicator
MSU - Message Signal Unit
SCCP - Signalling Connection Control Part
SCN - Switched Circuit Network
SCTP - Stream Control Transmission Protocol
SIF - Signalling Information Field
SIO - Service Information Octet
SLC - Signalling Link Code
SS7 - Signalling System Number 7
SSN - Stream Sequence Number
STP - Signal Transfer Point
1.5. Conventions
The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, NOT RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they
appear in this document, are to be interpreted as described in RFC
2119 [RFC 2119].
1.6. Signalling Transport Architecture
The architecture that has been defined [RFC 2719] for Switched
Circuit Network (SCN) signalling transport over IP uses multiple
components, including an IP transport protocol, the Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP), and an adaptation module to support the
services expected by a particular SCN signalling protocol from its
underlying protocol layer.
Within this framework architecture, this document defines an SCN
adaptation module that is suitable for the transport of SS7 MTP3
messages.
Figure 1 shows the seamless interworking at the MTP3 layer. MTP3
is adapted to the SCTP layer using the MTP2 User Peer-to-peer
Adaptation Layer (M2PA). All the primitives between MTP3 and MTP2 are
supported by M2PA. The SCTP association acts as one SS7 link between
the IPSPs. An IPSP MAY have the Signalling Connection Control Part
(SCCP) and other SS7 layers above MTP3.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 4
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
******** IP ********
* IPSP *--------* IPSP *
******** ********
+------+ +------+
| TCAP | | TCAP |
+------+ +------+
| SCCP | | SCCP |
+------+ +------+
| MTP3 | | MTP3 |
+------+ +------+
| M2PA | | M2PA |
+------+ +------+
| SCTP | | SCTP |
+------+ +------+
| IP | | IP |
+------+ +------+
IP - Internet Protocol
IPSP - IP Signalling Point
SCTP - Stream Control Transmission Protocol
(see Reference [RFC 2960])
Figure 1. M2PA Symmetrical Peer-to-Peer Architecture
Figure 2 shows an example of M2PA used in a Signalling Gateway
(SG). The SG is an IPSP equipped with both traditional SS7 and IP
network connections. In effect, the Signalling Gateway acts as a
Signal Transfer Point (STP). Any of the nodes in the diagram could
have SCCP or other SS7 layers. STPs MAY or MAY NOT be present in the
SS7 path between the SEP and the SG.
******** SS7 *************** IP ********
* SEP *--------* SG *--------* IPSP *
******** *************** ********
+------+ +------+
| TCAP | | TCAP |
+------+ +------+
| SCCP | | SCCP |
+------+ +-------------+ +------+
| MTP3 | | MTP3 | | MTP3 |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP2 | | MTP2 | M2PA | | M2PA |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP1 | | MTP1 | SCTP | | SCTP |
| | | +------+ +------+
| | | | IP | | IP |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
SEP - SS7 Signalling Endpoint
Figure 2. M2PA in IP Signalling Gateway
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 5
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Figure 2 only an example. Other configurations are possible. In
short, M2PA uses the SCTP association as an SS7 link. The
M2PA/SCTP/IP stack can be used in place of an MTP2/MTP1 stack.
1.6.1. Point Code Representation
The MTP specification requires that each node with an MTP3 layer is
identified by an SS7 point code. In particular, each IPSP MUST have
its own SS7 point code.
1.7. Services Provided by M2PA
The SS7 MTP3/MTP2 (MTP2-User) interface is retained in the IPSP.
The M2PA protocol layer is required to provide the equivalent set of
services to its user as provided by MTP Level 2 to MTP Level 3.
These services are described in the following subsections.
1.7.1. Support for MTP Level 2 / MTP Level 3 interface boundary
This interface is the same as the MTP2/MTP3 interface described in
Q.701 through Q.705 [Q.701, Q.702, Q.703, Q.704..T1.111], and Q.2140
[Q.2140], with the addition of support for larger sequence numbers in
T1.111 [T1.111] and Q.2210 [Q.2210].
Because M2PA uses larger sequence numbers than MTP2, the MTP3
Changeover procedure MUST use the Extended Changeover Order and
Extended Changeover Acknowledgment messages described in Q.2210
[Q.2210] and T1.111 [T1.111].
Also, the following MTP3/MTP2 primitives MUST use the larger
sequence numbers:
- BSNT Confirmation
- Retrieval Request and FSNC
1.7.2. Support for peer-to-peer communication
In SS7, MTP Level 2 sends three types of messages, known as signal
units: Message Signal Units (MSUs), Link Status Signal Units (LSSUs),
and Fill-In Signal Units (FISUs).
MSUs originate at a higher level than MTP2, and are destined for a
peer at another node. Likewise, M2PA passes these messages from MTP3
to SCTP as data for transport across a link. These are called User
Data messages in M2PA.
LSSUs allow peer MTP2 layers to exchange status information.
Analogous messages are needed for M2PA. The Link Status message
serves this purpose.
FISUs are sent when no other signal units are waiting to be sent.
This purpose is served by the heartbeat messages in SCTP. FISUs also
carry acknowledgment of messages. This function is performed by the
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 6
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
M2PA User Data and Link Status messages. Therefore, it is unnecessary
for M2PA to provide a protocol data unit like the FISU. Furthermore,
since an IP network is a shared resource, it would be undesirable to
have a message type that is sent continuously as the FISUs are.
1.8. Functions Provided by M2PA
1.8.1. Support of MTP3/MTP2 Primitives
M2PA receives the primitives sent from MTP3 to its lower layer.
M2PA processes these primitives or maps them to appropriate primitives
at the M2PA/SCTP interface. Likewise, M2PA sends primitives to MTP3
like those used in the MTP3/MTP2 interface.
1.8.2. MTP2 Functionality
M2PA provides MTP2 functionality that is not provided by SCTP.
This includes
- Data retrieval to support the MTP3 changeover procedure
- Reporting of link status changes to MTP3
- Processor outage procedure
- Link alignment procedure
SCTP provides reliable, sequenced delivery of messages.
1.8.3. Mapping of SS7 and IP Entities
The M2PA layer MUST maintain a map of each of its SS7 links to the
corresponding SCTP association.
1.8.4. SCTP Stream Management
SCTP allows a user-specified number of streams to be opened during
the initialization. It is the responsibility of the M2PA layer to
ensure proper management of the streams allowed within each
association.
M2PA uses two streams in each direction for each association.
Stream 0 in each direction is designated for Link Status messages.
Stream 1 is designated for User Data messages. Separating the Link
Status and User Data messages onto separate streams allows M2PA to
prioritize the messages in a manner similar to MTP2.
1.8.5. Retention of MTP3 in the SS7 Network
M2PA allows MTP3 to perform all of its Message Handling and Network
Management functions with IPSPs as with other SS7 nodes.
1.9. Definition of the M2PA Boundaries
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 7
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
1.9.1. Definition of the M2PA / MTP Level 3 boundary
The upper layer primitives provided by M2PA are the same as those
provided by MTP2 to MTP3. These primitives are described in Q.701
through Q.705 [Q.701, Q.702, Q.703, Q.704, Q.705], and T1.111
[T1.111]. and Q.2140 [Q.2140]. Following is a list of the
primitives.
Primitives sent from MTP3 to M2PA:
Data Request Used to send a Data Message for transmission.
Start Request Used to activate a link.
Stop Request Used to deactivate a link.
Retrieve BSNT Request the BSNT for the changeover
Request procedure.
Retrieval Request Request retrieval of unacknowledged and
and FSNC unsent messages. This request includes the
FSNC received from the remote end.
Local Processor Informs M2PA of a local processor outage
Outage Request condition.
Local Processor Informs M2PA that a local processor outage
Outage Recovered condition has ceased.
Request
Flush Buffers Requests that all transmit and receive
Request buffers be emptied.
Continue Request Requests that processing resume after a
processor outage.
Emergency Request Requests that M2PA use the emergency
alignment procedure.
Emergency Ceases Requests that M2PA use the normal alignment
Request procedure.
Primitives sent from M2PA to MTP3:
Data Indication Used to deliver received Data Message to
MTP3.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 8
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Congestion Indicates change in congestion status. The
Indication indication includes the congestion status, if
the protocol is using the OPTIONAL congestion
levels. The indication also includes the
discard status.
In Service Indicates that the link is in service.
Indication
Out of Service Indicates that the link is out of service.
Indication
Retrieved Messages Indicates delivery of unacknowledged and
Indication unsent messages.
Retrieval Complete Indicates that delivery of unacknowledged and
Indication unsent messages is complete.
BSNT Confirm Replies to the BSNT Request. The
confirmation includes the BSNT.
BSNT Not Retrievable Replies to the BSNT Request when the BSNT
Confirm cannot be determined.
Remote Processor Indicates processor outage at remote end.
Outage Indication
Remote Processor Indicates recovery from processor outage at
Recovered Indication remote end.
1.9.2. Definition of the Lower Layer Boundary between M2PA and SCTP
The upper layer primitives provided by SCTP are described in RFC
2960 [RFC 2960] Section 10 "Interface with Upper Layer".
1.10. Differences Between M2PA and M2UA
The MTP2 User Adaptation Layer (M2UA) [M2UA] also adapts the MTP3
layer to the SCTP/IP stack. It does so through a backhauling
architecture [RFC 2719]. This section intends to clarify some of the
differences between the M2PA and M2UA approaches.
A possible M2PA architecture is shown in Figure 3. Here the IPSPs
MTP3 uses its underlying M2PA as a replacement for MTP2.
Communication between the two layers MTP3/M2PA is defined by the same
primitives as in SS7 MTP3/MTP2. M2PA performs functions similar to
MTP2.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 9
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
******** SS7 *************** IP ********
* SEP *--------* SG *--------* IPSP *
******** *************** ********
+------+ +-------------+ +------+
| SCCP | | SCCP | | SCCP |
+------+ +-------------+ +------+
| MTP3 | | MTP3 | | MTP3 |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP2 | | MTP2 | M2PA | | M2PA |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP1 | | MTP1 | SCTP | | SCTP |
| | | +------+ +------+
| | | | IP | | IP |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
Figure 3. M2PA in IP Signalling Gateway
A comparable architecture for M2UA is shown in Figure 4. In M2UA,
the MGCs MTP3 uses the SG's MTP2 as its lower SS7 layer. Likewise,
the SG's MTP2 uses the MGCs MTP3 as its upper SS7 layer. In SS7,
communication between the MTP3 and MTP2 layers is defined by
primitives. In M2UA, the MTP3/MTP2 communication is defined as M2UA
messages and sent over the IP connection.
******** SS7 *************** IP ********
* SEP *--------* SG *--------* MGC *
******** *************** ********
+------+ +------+
| SCCP | | SCCP |
+------+ +------+
| MTP3 | (NIF) | MTP3 |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP2 | | MTP2 | M2UA | | M2UA |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
| MTP1 | | MTP1 | SCTP | | SCTP |
| | | +------+ +------+
| | | | IP | | IP |
+------+ +------+------+ +------+
NIF - Nodal Interworking Function
Figure 4. M2UA in IP Signalling Gateway
M2PA and M2UA are similar in that:
a. Both Transport MTP3 data messages.
b. Both Present an MTP2 upper interface to MTP3.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 10
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Differences between M2PA and M2UA include:
a. M2PA: IPSP processes MTP3/MTP2 primitives.
M2UA: MGC transports MTP3/MTP2 primitives
between the SG's MTP2 and the MGCs MTP3
(via the NIF) for processing.
b. M2PA: SG-IPSP connection is an SS7 link.
M2UA: SG-MGC connection is not an SS7 link.
It is an extension of MTP to a remote
entity.
c. M2PA: SG is an SS7 node with a point code.
M2UA: SG is not an SS7 node and has no point
code.
d. M2PA: SG can have upper SS7 layers, e.g.,
SCCP.
M2UA: SG does not have upper SS7 layers since
it has no MTP3.
e. M2PA: relies on MTP3 for management
procedures.
M2UA: uses M2UA management procedures.
Potential users of M2PA and M2UA SHOULD be aware of these
differences when deciding how to use them for SS7 signalling transport
over IP networks.
2. Protocol Elements
This section describes the format of various messages used in this
protocol.
All fields in an M2PA message MUST be transmitted in the network
byte order, i.e., most significant byte first, unless otherwise
stated.
2.1. Common Message Header
The protocol messages for M2PA require a message header structure
which contains a version, message class, message type, and message
length. The header structure is shown in Figure 5.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version | Spare | Message Class | Message Type |
+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+
| Message Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5. Common Message Header
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 11
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
2.1.1. Version
The version field contains the version of M2PA. The supported
versions are:
Value
(decimal) Version
-----------------------------------------
1 Release 1.0 of M2PA protocol
2.1.2. Spare
The Spare field SHOULD be set to all zeroes (0's) by the sender and
ignored by the receiver. The Spare field SHOULD NOT be used for
proprietary information.
2.1.3. Message Class
The following List contains the valid Message Classes:
Value
(decimal) Message Class
---------------------------
11 M2PA Messages
Other values are invalid for M2PA.
2.1.4. Message Type
The following list contains the message types for the defined
messages.
Value
(decimal) Message Type
-------------------------
1 User Data
2 Link Status
Other values are invalid.
2.1.5. Message Length
The Message Length defines the length of the message in octets,
including the Common Header.
2.2. M2PA Header
All protocol messages for M2PA require an M2PA-specific header.
The header structure is shown in Figure 6.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 12
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| unused | BSN |
+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
| unused | FSN |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6. M2PA-specific Message Header
2.2.1. Backward Sequence Number
This is the FSN of the message last received from the peer.
2.2.2. Forward Sequence Number
This is the M2PA sequence number of the User Data message being
sent.
2.3. M2PA Messages
The following section defines the messages and parameter contents.
An M2PA message consists of a Common Message Header and M2PA Header
followed by the data appropriate to the message.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ \
/ Common Message Header /
\ \
+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
\ \
/ M2PA-specific Message Header /
\ \
+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
/ /
\ \
/ Message Data /
\ \
/ /
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
2.3.1. User Data
The User Data is the data sent from MTP3. The format for the User
Data message is as follows:
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 13
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
/ /
\ \
/ Data /
\ \
/ /
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Data field contains the following fields of the MTP Message
Signal Unit (MSU):
- Length Indicator (LI), including the two undefined bits between
the SIO and LI fields.
- Service Information Octet (SIO)
- Signalling Information Field (SIF)
The MTP MSU described in Q.703 [Q.703], section 2.2 Signal Unit
Format, and T1.111.3 [T1.111] section 2.2 Signal Unit Format.
M2PA does not add padding to the MTP3 message.
Note that the Data field SHALL NOT contain other components of the
MTP MSU format:
- Flag
- Backward Sequence Number (BSN)
- Backward Indicator Bit (BIB)
- Forward Sequence Number (FSN)
- Forward Indicator Bit (FIB)
- Check bits (CK)
The Data field SHALL be transmitted in the byte order as defined by
MTP3.
It is not necessary to put the message length in the LI octet as in
MTP2. The LI octet is included because the two spare bits in the LI
octet are used by MTP3 in at least one national version of SS7 to
carry MTP3 information. For example, the Japanese TTC standard uses
these spare bits as an MTP3 Message Priority field. See JT-Q704 [JT-
Q704], section 14 "Common Characteristics of message signal unit
formats", section 14.2 (A) Priority Indicator (PRI). For versions of
MTP that do not use these two bits, the entire octet is spare.
Therefore in M2PA the format of the LI octet is:
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|PRI| spare | (followed by SIO, SIF)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 14
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
PRI -
Priority used only in national MTP defined in JT-Q704 [JT-Q704].
Spare for other MTP versions.
Since the LI octet is not used for a message length, there is no
need to support the expanded LI field in Q.703 [Q.703], Annex A.
Therefore the LI field in M2PA is always one octet.
Note: In the SS7 Recommendations, the format of the messages and
fields within the messages are based on bit transmission order. In
these recommendations the Least Significant Bit (LSB) of each field is
positioned to the right. The received SS7 fields are populated octet
by octet as received into the 4-octet word as shown below.
As an example, in the ANSI MTP protocol, the Data field format is
shown below:
|MSB---------------------------------------------------------LSB|
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
.)b
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|PRI| spare | SIO | SIF octet | ... |
+- -+- - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+
\ . \
/ . /
\ . \
+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - -+
| ... | ... | ... | SIF octet |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Within each octet the Least Significant Bit (LSB) per the SS7
Recommendations is to the right (e.g., bit 15 of SIO is the LSB).
2.3.2. Link Status
The MTP2 Link Status message can be sent between M2PA peers to
indicate link status. This message performs a function similar to the
the Link Status Signal Unit in MTP2. The format for the Link Status
message is as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| State |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The valid values for State are shown in the following table.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 15
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Value
(decimal) Description
-----------------------------------
1 Alignment
2 Proving Normal
3 Proving Emergency
4 Ready
5 Processor Outage
6 Processor Outage Ended
7 Busy
8 Busy Ended
9 Out of Service
2.3.2.1. Link Status Proving
The Link Status Proving message MAY OPTIONALLY carry additional
bytes. If the OPTIONAL bytes are used, the format for the message is
as follows.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| State |
+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
\ \
/ filler /
\ \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
It is RECOMMENDED that the length of the Link Status Proving
message be similar to the size of the User Data messages that will be
carried on the link.
It is RECOMMENDED that the filler field contain a number pattern
which varies among the Link Status Proving messages, and that will
allow the SCTP checksum to be used to verify the accuracy of
transmission.
3. M2PA Link State Control
The M2PA link moves from one state to another in response to
various events. The events that MAY result in a change of state
include:
- MTP3 primitive requests
- SCTP notifications
- Receipt of Status messages from the peer M2PA
- Expiration of certain timers
Figure 7 illustrates state changes together with the causing
events. Note that some of the error conditions are not shown in the
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 16
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
state diagram.
Following is a list of the M2PA Link States and a description of
each.
POWER OFF - State of the link during power-up
initialization.
OUT OF SERVICE - Out Of Service. Power-up initialization is
complete.
INITIAL ALIGNMENT - Alignment In Progress. M2PA is attempting to
exchange Alignment messages with its peer.
PROVING - M2PA is sending Link Status Proving messages
to its peer.
ALIGNED READY - Proving is complete. M2PA is waiting until
peer completes proving.
ALIGNED NOT READY - Proving is complete, but local or remote
processor is out.
IN SERVICE - In Service. Link is ready for traffic.
PROCESSOR OUTAGE - In Service, but the local or remote processor
is out.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 17
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
+-----------+
| POWER |
| OFF |
+-----------+
| Power On
Flush Buffers |
OR Retrieval | +-------------------------+
+-------+ | | |
| | V V |
| +-----------+ |
+--->| OUT OF | |
+--------------->| SERVICE |<--+ |
| +-----------+ | Link Configured |
| | | | (Associate) |
| MTP3 Start | +-----+ |
| V |
| +-----------+ |
| | INITIAL | |
+<---------------| ALIGNMENT |--------------------->+
| MTP3 Stop +-----------+ SCTP Comm Error |
| OR T2 Expiry | | OR SCTP Comm Lost |
| OR Receive LS OOS | +-------------------------|---------+
| | Send and | |
| Send V Receive LS Alignment | |
| Proving +----------+ | |
| | PROVING | LPO/LPR | |
|<----------------| |<---------------------|-------->|
| MTP3 Stop +----------+ | |
| OR T3 Expiry | T4 Expiry | |
| OR Receive LS OOS V Send LS Ready | |
| +-----------+ LPO/LPR | +-----------+
| | ALIGNED |<---------------------|-->| ALIGNED |
+<---------------| READY |--------------------->+ | NOT READY |
| MTP3 Stop +-----------+ SCTP Comm Error +-----------+
| OR T1 Expiry | OR SCTP Comm Lost |
| OR Receive LS OOS | |
| | Receive LS Ready |
| | OR Receive User Data |
| V V
| +-----------+ LPO/LPR +-----------+
| | IN |<------------------------>| PROCESSOR |
| | SERVICE | | OUTAGE |
| +-----------+ +-----------+
| | MTP3 Stop |
| | OR Receive LS OOS |
| | OR SCTP Comm Error |
| | OR SCTP Comm Lost |
| | OR T6 Expiry |
| | OR T7 Expiry |
| | OR M2PA Link Failure |
+<---------------------+<-------------------------------------+
Figure 7. M2PA Link State Transition Diagram
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 18
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Figure 8 illustrates state changes in the M2PA management of the
SCTP association together with the causing events. Note that some of
the error conditions are not shown in the state diagram.
Following is a list of the M2PA Association States and a
description of each.
IDLE - State of the association during power-up
initialization.
ASSOCIATE - M2PA is attempting to establish an SCTP association.
ESTABLISHED - SCTP association is established.
+-----------+
| IDLE |
+-----------+
|
| Associate
| (Issue SCTP associate)
|
| +----------------------+
| | (Issue SCTP |
V V associate) |
+-----------+ |
| ASSOCIATE |------------------->+
+-----------+ SCTP Comm Error |
| |
| |
| SCTP Comm Up |
| |
V |
+-------------+ |
| ESTABLISHED |----------------->+
+-------------+ SCTP Comm Error
OR SCTP Comm Lost
Figure 8. M2PA Association State Transition Diagram
4. Procedures
4.1. Procedures to Support MTP2 Features
4.1.1. Signal Unit Format, Delimitation, Acceptance
Messages for transmission across the network MUST follow the format
described in section 2.
SCTP provides reliable, in-sequence delivery. Therefore the
related functionality of MTP2 is not needed. SCTP does not provide
functions related to Link State Control in MTP2. These functions MUST
be provided by M2PA.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 19
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
4.1.2. MTP and SCTP Entities
This section describes how M2PA relates MTP and SCTP entities.
Each MTP link corresponds to an SCTP association. To prevent
duplicate associations from being established, it is RECOMMENDED that
each endpoint know the IP address (or IP addresses, if multi-homing is
used) and port number of both endpoints. SCTP prevents two
associations with the same IP addresses and port numbers from being
established.
It is necessary for at least one of the endpoints to be listening
on the port on which the other endpoint is trying to establish the
association. Therefore, at least one of the port numbers SHOULD be
the M2PA registered port.
If only one association is to be established between these two IP
addresses, then the association SHOULD be established using the M2PA
registered port at each endpoint.
If it is desirable to create multiple associations (for multiple
links) between the two IP addresses, different port numbers can be
used for each association. Nevertheless, the M2PA registered port
number SHOULD be used at one end of each association.
Each combination of IP address/port for the two endpoints (i.e.,
each association) MUST be mapped to the same Signalling Link Code
(SLC) at each endpoint, so that each endpoint knows which link is
being created at the time the SCTP association is established.
However, M2PA does not do any processing based on the SLC.
Following are examples of the relationships between associations
and links. Note that a link is an SCTP association identified by two
endpoints. Each endpoint is identified by an IP address and port
number. Each association is mapped to an SLC.
Figure 9 shows a case with two IPSPs, each with two IP addresses.
Two associations are the links that connect the two IPSPs. Since
these links are in the same link set, they MUST have different SLCs.
Table 1 shows the relationships in tabular form. Table 1 is only
conceptual. The actual method for mapping the SCTP associations to
the SLCs is implementation dependent.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 20
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
IPSP X IPSP Y
+-------------+ +-------------+
| | SCTP | |
| IPA | association 1 | IPB |
| port = PW +---------------+ port = PW |
| SLC = a | | SLC = a |
| | | |
| | | |
| | SCTP | |
| IPC | association 2 | IPD |
| port = PW +---------------+ port = PW |
| SLC = b | | SLC = b |
| | | |
| | | |
+-------------+ +-------------+
IPx = IP address
PW = Registered port number for M2PA
Figure 9. Two IPSPs with Two IP Addresses Each
Table 1. Two IPSPs with Two IP Addresses Each
+------------+-------------------+-------------------+-----+
|Association | IPSP X | IPSP Y | SLC |
| +------------+------+------------+------+ |
| | IP address | Port | IP address | Port | |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 1 | IPA | PW | IPB | PW | a |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 2 | IPC | PW | IPD | PW | b |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
Figure 10 and Table 2 show an example with three IPSPs. Note that
in this example, the two links are in different link sets. Therefore,
it is possible that the values a and b MAY be equal.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 21
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
IPSP X IPSP Y
+-------------+ +-------------+
| | SCTP | |
| IPA | association 1 | IPB |
| port = PW +---------------+ port = PW |
| SLC = a | | SLC = a |
| | | |
| | | |
| | SCTP | |
| IPC | association 2 | |
| port = PW +-------+ | |
| SLC = b | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
+-------------+ | +-------------+
|
|
| IPSP Z
|
| +-------------+
| | |
| | IPD |
+-------+ port = PW |
| SLC = b |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
+-------------+
IPx = IP address
PW = Registered port number for M2PA
Figure 10. One IPSP Connected to Two IPSPs
Table 2. One IPSP Connected to Two IPSPs
+------------+-------------------+-------------------+-----+
|Association | IPSP X | IPSP Y | SLC |
| +------------+------+------------+------+ |
| | IP address | Port | IP address | Port | |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 1 | IPA | PW | IPB | PW | a |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 2 | IPC | PW | IPD | PW | b |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 22
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Figure 11 and Table 3 show two associations between the same IP
addresses. This is accomplished by using different port numbers for
each association at one endpoint.
IPSP X IPSP Y
+-------------+ +-------------+
| | SCTP | |
| IPA | association 1 | IPB |
| port = P1 +---------------+ port = PW |
| SLC = a | | SLC = a |
| | | |
| | | |
| | SCTP | |
| IPA | association 2 | IPB |
| port = PW +---------------+ port = PW |
| SLC = b | | SLC = b |
| | | |
| | | |
+-------------+ +-------------+
IPx = IP address
P1 = Pre-selected port number
PW = Registered port number for M2PA
Figure 11. Multiple Associations Between Two IP Addresses
Table 3. Multiple Associations Between Two IP Addresses
+------------+-------------------+-------------------+-----+
|Association | IPSP X | IPSP Y | SLC |
| +------------+------+------------+------+ |
| | IP address | Port | IP address | Port | |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 1 | IPA | P1 | IPB | PW | a |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
| 2 | IPA | PW | IPB | PW | b |
+------------+------------+------+------------+------+-----+
The association SHALL contain two streams in each direction.
Stream 0 is designated for Link Status messages. Stream 1 is
designated for User Data messages.
4.1.3. Link Alignment
The purposes of the alignment procedure are:
(1) To provide a handshaking procedure so that both endpoints are
prepared to send SS7 traffic, and to prevent traffic from being
sent before the other end is ready.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 23
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
(2) To verify that the SCTP association is suitable for use as an
SS7 link.
Link alignment takes place after the association is established.
If SCTP fails to establish the association, and M2PA has received a
Start Request from its MTP3, then M2PA SHALL report to MTP3 that the
link is out of service.
After the association is established, M2PA SHALL send a Link Status
Out of Service message to its peer.
Once the association is established and M2PA has received a Start
Request from MTP3, M2PA sends the Link Status Alignment message to its
peer. If M2PA has not already received the Link Status Alignment
message from its peer, then M2PA starts timer T2.
(Note that if the remote M2PA has not received a Start Request from
its MTP3, it will not send the Link Status Alignment message to the
local M2PA. Eventually timer T2 in the local M2PA will expire. If
the remote M2PA receives a Start Request from its MTP3 and sends Link
Status Alignment before the local M2PA timer T2 expires, the alignment
procedure can continue.)
M2PA stops timer T2 when it has received the Link Status Alignment
message from its peer.
If timer T2 expires, then M2PA reports to MTP3 that the link is out
of service. M2PA sends Link Status Out of Service to its peer. M2PA
SHOULD leave the association established. M2PA waits for MTP3 to
initiate the alignment procedure again.
Note: Between the time M2PA sends Link Status Alignment to its peer
and receives Link Status Alignment from its peer, M2PA MAY receive
Link Status Out of Service from its peer. This message is ignored.
After receiving Link Status Alignment from the peer, receipt of a Link
Status Out of Service message causes M2PA to send Out of Service to
MTP3 and return to the Out of Service state.
When M2PA has both sent and received the Link Status Alignment
message, it has completed alignment. M2PA starts the aligned timer T3
and moves to the proving state.
M2PA stops timer T3 when it receives a Proving Normal or Proving
Emergency message and starts proving period timer T4.
If timer T3 expires, then M2PA reports to MTP3 that the link is out
of service. M2PA sends Link Status Out of Service to its peer. M2PA
SHOULD leave the association established. M2PA waits for MTP3 to
initiate the alignment procedure again.
M2PA starts the proving period timer T4. During the proving
period, M2PA sends Link Status Proving messages to its peer at an
interval defined by the protocol parameter Proving_Rate. M2PA sends
either the Proving Normal or Proving Emergency message, according to
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 24
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
the Emergency and Emergency Ceases commands from MTP3. M2PA uses the
value of T4 corresponding to the Normal or Emergency state. However,
if M2PA receives a Link Status Proving Emergency message from its
peer, then M2PA SHALL initiate the Emergency proving period value for
T4, but it SHALL continue to send the Proving message (Normal or
Emergency) determined by its own upper layer MTP3.
When the proving period timer T4 expires, M2PA SHALL start the
timer T1 and send Link Status Ready messages to its peer at interval
Status_Interval. These messages are used to verify that both ends
have completed proving.
M2PA SHALL stop timer T1 when it receives a Link Status Ready or
User Data message from its peer. If timer T1 expires, then M2PA
reports to MTP3 that the link is out of service. M2PA sends Link
Status Out of Service to its peer. M2PA SHOULD leave the association
established. M2PA waits for MTP3 to initiate the alignment procedure
again.
Note that if M2PA has already received a Link Status Ready message
from its peer when its timer T4 expires, there is no need to start
timer T1. M2PA can just send Link Status Ready to the peer and
continue along.
When all of the following are true:
(a) M2PA has received a Start Request from MTP3.
(b) M2PA proving period T4 has expired.
(c) M2PA has sent a Link Status Ready to its peer.
(d) M2PA has received a Link Status Ready OR User Data message from
its peer.
(e) M2PA has not received Link Status Out of Service from its peer
since it received Link Status Alignment.
then M2PA SHALL send Link In Service to its MTP3.
If there is a local processor outage condition during the alignment
procedure, M2PA sends Link Status Processor Outage to its peer. When
the local processor outage condition ends, then M2PA SHALL send Link
Status Processor Outage Ended to its peer. M2PA SHALL attempt to
complete the alignment procedure during the local processor outage
condition.
If M2PA receives a Link Status Processor Outage during alignment,
and M2PA had received a Start Request from its MTP3, M2PA SHALL report
Remote Processor Outage to MTP3. M2PA SHALL attempt to complete the
alignment procedure during the remote processor outage condition.
If M2PA receives a Stop command from its MTP3 during alignment,
M2PA SHALL send Link Status Out of Service to its peer and terminate
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 25
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
the alignment procedure.
Anomalous messages received during alignment SHOULD be discarded.
Examples include:
(a) User Data received before proving begins.
(b) Link Status Alignment received before or during proving.
Recommended values:
Table 4. Recommended Timer Values
+-----------------+--------------------------------+
| | (seconds) |
| Timer +----------------------+---------+
| | Range | Default |
+-----------------+----------------------+---------+
|T1 (Ready) | 40 - 50 | 45 |
|T2 (Not Aligned) | 5 - 150 | 60 |
|T3 (Aligned) | 1.0 - 1.5 | 1.0 |
|T4 (Normal) | 7.5 - 9.5 | 8 |
|T4 (Emerg) | 0.400 - 0.600 | 0.500 |
+-----------------+----------------------+---------+
|Status_Interval | implementation dependent |
|Proving_Rate | implementation dependent |
+-----------------+--------------------------------+
4.1.4. Processor Outage
A processor outage occurs when M2PA cannot transfer messages
because of a condition at a higher layer than M2PA.
When M2PA detects a local processor outage, it sends a Link Status
message to its peer with status Processor Outage. M2PA SHALL also
cease sending User Data messages to SCTP for transmission. M2PA SHALL
stop receiving incoming User Data messages from SCTP.
M2PA SHOULD periodically send a Link Status Processor Outage
message as long as there is a local processor outage and the link is
in service. If the link is out of service, M2PA SHOULD locally mark
that it is in local processor outage.
The peer M2PA, upon receiving the Link Status Processor Outage
message, SHALL report Remote Processor Outage to its MTP3. The peer
M2PA ceases sending User Data messages. M2PA stops the Remote
Congestion timer T6 (see section 4.1.5 Level 2 Flow Control) if it is
running.
MTP3 MAY send a Flush Buffers or Continue command to M2PA as part
of its processor outage procedure (See section 4.2.4 Flush Buffers,
Continue). Alternatively, MTP3 MAY perform data retrieval as part of
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 26
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
a changeover procedure.
When the processor outage ceases, MTP3 sends a Local Processor
Recovered indication to M2PA. The local M2PA notifies its peer by
sending a Link Status message with status Processor Outage Ended. The
peer uses the Remote Processor Recovered Indication to notify its MTP3
that the remote processor outage condition has ceased.
4.1.5. Level 2 Flow Control
The determination of receive congestion in M2PA is implementation
dependent.
If M2PA determines that it is in receive congestion for an
association, M2PA SHALL send a Link Status Busy message to its peer on
that association. M2PA SHALL continue to acknowledge incoming
messages.
M2PA SHOULD periodically send a Link Status Busy message as long as
it is in receive congestion.
M2PA SHALL continue transmitting messages while it is in receive
congestion.
When the peer M2PA receives the Link Status Busy message, it SHALL
start the Remote Congestion timer T6. If timer T6 expires, M2PA SHALL
take the link out of service. M2PA sends a Link Status Out of Service
message to its peer, and goes to the Retrieval state.
The peer M2PA SHOULD continue transmitting messages to SCTP while
its T6 timer is running, i.e., while the other end is Busy.
The peer M2PA SHALL not fail the link due to expiration of timer T7
excessive delay of acknowledgment (see section 4.2.1 Sending and
receiving messages) while its T6 timer is running, i.e., while the
other end is Busy.
If M2PA is no longer in receive congestion for the association,
M2PA SHALL send a Link Status Busy Ended message to its peer on that
association.
When the peer M2PA receives the Link Status Busy Ended message, it
SHALL stop timer T6.
Recommended values:
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 27
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Table 5. Recommended Timer Values
+----------+-------------------------+
| | (seconds) |
| Timer +---------------+---------+
| | Range | Default |
+----------+---------------+---------+
|T6 (Busy) | 3.0 - 6.0 | 4.5 |
+----------+---------------+---------+
4.1.6. Error Monitoring
If M2PA loses the SCTP association for a link, M2PA SHALL report to
MTP3 that the link is out of service.
4.1.7. Transmission and Reception Priorities
In MTP, Link Status messages have priority over User Data messages
(Q.703 [Q.703], section 11.2). To achieve this in M2PA, M2PA SHALL
send Link Status and User Data messages on separate streams in its
SCTP association. All messages are sent using the ordered delivery
option.
M2PA SHOULD give higher priority to Link Status messages than to
User Data messages when sending messages to SCTP.
M2PA SHOULD give higher priority to reading the Link Status stream
than to reading the User Data stream.
M2PA SHOULD give higher priority to receiving notifications from
SCTP than to reading either the Link Status stream or the User Data
stream.
4.1.8. M2PA Version Control
A node upgraded to a newer version of M2PA SHOULD support the older
versions used on other nodes with which it is communicating. If that
is the case, then alignment can proceed normally.
In particular, it is RECOMMENDED that for future modifications to
this protocol:
- Any newer version SHOULD be able to process the messages from a
lower version.
- A newer version of M2PA SHOULD refrain from sending messages to an
older version of M2PA messages that the older version cannot
process.
- If an older version of M2PA receives a message that it cannot
process, it SHOULD discard the message.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 28
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
- In cases where different processing is done in two versions for the
same format of a message, then the newer version SHOULD contain
procedures to recognize this and handle it appropriately.
In case a newer version of M2PA is incompatible with an older
version, the newer version SHOULD recognize this and prevent the
alignment of the link. If a Link Status Alignment message with an
unsupported version is received by the newer version, the receiving
end's M2PA SHALL not complete the alignment procedure.
4.2. Procedures to Support the MTP3/MTP2 Interface
4.2.1. Sending and receiving messages
When MTP3 sends a message for transmission to M2PA, M2PA passes the
corresponding M2PA message to SCTP using the SEND primitive.
M2PA Link Status messages are passed to SCTP using the SEND
primitive.
Link Status and User Data messages SHALL be sent via SCTP on
separate streams.
When M2PA receives a User Data message from SCTP, M2PA passes the
message to MTP3.
If M2PA receives a message from SCTP with an invalid Message Class
or unsupported Message Type in the Common Message Header, M2PA SHALL
discard the message.
The first User Data message sent after the link is placed in
service is given a Forward Sequence Number (FSN) of 1.
The Forward Sequence Number of the header is incremented by 1 for
each User Data message sent. When the FSN reaches the maximum value,
the next FSN is 0.
For message types other than User Data, the Forward Sequence Number
is set to the FSN of the last User Data message sent.
The Backward Sequence Number is set to the FSN of the last User
Data message M2PA received from its peer. This serves as an M2PA-
level acknowledgment of the message. After the link is placed in
service and before a User Data message has been received, the BSN is
set to 0.
When M2PA receives a User Data message with Backward Sequence
Number equal to its queue.
If M2PA receives a User Data message with an FSN that is out of
order, M2PA SHALL fail the link.
M2PA SHOULD follow the criterion stated in Q.703 [Q.703], section
5.3.1 for incorrect BSNs: If any two BSNs in three consecutively
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 29
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
received User Data messages are not the same as the previous one or
any of the FSNs of the User Data messages in the M2PA retransmit
buffer at the time they are received, then MTP3 SHOULD be informed
that the link is faulty.
M2PA SHOULD ignore the FSN and BSN contained in a Link Status
message.
Note: In all calculations involving FSN and BSN, the programmer
SHOULD be aware that the value wraps around to 0 after reaching its
maximum value.
If there is no other User Data message to be sent when there is a
message to acknowledge, M2PA MAY send a User Data message with no data
payload. The FSN for this empty User Data message is not incremented.
It MUST contain the same FSN as the most recently sent User Data
message containing Data.
If M2PA receives an empty User Data message, it SHALL not send an
acknowledgment of that message.
Note that there is no reason to place empty User Data messages in
the MT2PA transmit buffer, since the empty messages are not
retransmitted and timer T7 (below) does not apply to them.
Note that since SCTP provides reliable delivery and ordered
delivery within the stream, M2PA does not perform retransmissions.
Timer T7 provides an indication of excessive delay of
acknowledgment. If the following conditions are true:
(a) There is at least one message in the M2PA retransmit buffer.
(b) The remote M2PA is not in a Busy condition (i.e. local timer T6
is not running).
(c) There is a message in the M2PA retransmit buffer that has not
received an acknowledgment in the span of T7 since its last
transmission.
Then M2PA SHOULD fail the link.
Recommended values:
Table 6. Recommended Timer Values
+---------+-------------------------+
| | (seconds) |
| Timer +---------------+---------+
| | Range | Default |
+---------+---------------+---------+
|T7 (Ack) | 0.5 - 2.0 | 1.0 |
+---------+---------------+---------+
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 30
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
4.2.2. Link activation and restoration
When MTP3 requests that M2PA activate or restore a link by a Start
Request, M2PA SHALL follow the alignment procedure in section 4.1.3.
4.2.3. Link deactivation
When MTP3 requests that M2PA deactivate a link by a Stop command,
M2PA SHALL send a Link Status Out of Service message to its peer.
The peer M2PA, upon receiving Link Status Out of Service, SHALL
notify its upper layer MTP3 that the link is out of service.
4.2.4. Flush Buffers, Continue
The Flush Buffers and Continue commands allow M2PA to resume normal
operations (i.e., transmission of messages to SCTP and receiving
messages from SCTP) after a processor outage (local and/or remote)
ceases.
If M2PA receives a Flush Buffers command from MTP3, M2PA:
(a) SHALL not transmit any messages to SCTP that are currently
waiting to be transmitted to SCTP. These messages SHALL be
discarded.
(b) SHALL discard all messages currently waiting to be passed to
MTP3.
If M2PA receives either a Flush Buffers or Continue command from
MTP3, and the processor outage condition ceases, M2PA SHALL resume
receiving and transmitting messages.
4.2.5. MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion
M2PA SHALL detect transmit congestion in its buffers according to
the requirements for signalling link transmit congestion in Q.704
[Q.704], section 3.8.
M2PA SHALL use the Congestion Indication primitive to notify its
upper layer MTP3 of changes in the signalling link congestion status
and the signalling link discard status. For national networks with
multiple congestion threshold levels, M2PA SHALL notify MTP3 of the
congestion and discard status levels.
4.2.6. Changeover
The objective of the changeover is to ensure that signalling
traffic carried by the unavailable signalling link is diverted to the
alternative signalling link(s) as quickly as possible while avoiding
message loss, duplication, or mis-sequencing. For this purpose, the
changeover procedure includes data retrieval, which is performed
before opening the alternative signalling links to the diverted
traffic. Data retrieval consists of these steps:
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 31
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
(1) buffer updating, i.e., identifying all those User Data messages
in the retransmission buffer of the unavailable signalling link
which have not been received by the far end M2PA, as well as
not transmitted messages, and
(2) transferring those messages to the transmission buffers of the
alternate links.
Note that only User Data messages are retrieved and transmitted
over the alternate links. Link Status messages SHALL not be retrieved
and transmitted over the alternate links.
M2PA Sequence Numbers are 24 bits long. MTP2's Forward and
Backward Sequence Numbers are only seven bits long. Hence it is
necessary for MTP3 to accommodate the larger sequence numbers. This
is done through the use of the Extended Changeover Order (XCO) and
Extended Changeover Acknowledgment (XCA) messages instead of the
Changeover Order (COO) and Changeover Acknowledgment (COA) messages.
The XCO and XCA messages are specified in Q.2210 [Q.2210], section
9.8.1 and Reference T1.111.4 [T1.111], section 15.4. Only the XCO and
XCA messages from Q.2210 [Q.2210] or T1.111 [T1.111] are required.
The BSN is placed in the XCO/XCA message as explained in Q.2210
[Q.2210] and T1.111 [T1.111].
Also, the following MTP3/MTP2 primitives MUST use the larger
sequence numbers:
- BSNT Confirmation
- Retrieval Request and FSNC
For data retrieval, MTP3 requests the Backward Sequence Number to
be Transmitted (BSNT) from M2PA through the Retrieve BSNT request.
M2PA determines the Forward Sequence Number of the last User Data
message received from the peer. This value is the BSNT. M2PA sends
the BSNT value to MTP3 in the BSNT confirmation. In the same way, the
remote end also detects its BSNT. The MTP3 layers exchange BSNT
values through the XCO and XCA messages. The BSNT received from the
other end is called the FSNC. When MTP3 receives the FSNC from the
other end, MTP3 retrieves all the unsent and unacknowledged messages
starting with sequence number (FSNC + 1). This is accomplished
through a Retrieval Request and FSNC request. After all the messages
are sent from M2PA to MTP3, M2PA sends a Retrieval Complete indication
to MTP3.
If there are any messages on the M2PA or SCTP receive queues that
have not been acknowledged by M2PA, M2PA SHOULD discard these
messages. The peer will retransmit them on an alternate link. Any
messages acknowledged by M2PA MUST NOT be discarded. These messages
MUST be delivered to MTP3.
If M2PA receives a Retrieve BSNT request from MTP3, M2PA SHALL
respond with the BSNT confirmation. The BSNT value is the Forward
Sequence Number of the last User Data message received from the peer.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 32
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
If M2PA receives a Retrieval Request and FSNC request from MTP3,
M2PA SHALL retrieve from its buffers in order and deliver to MTP3:
(a) any transmitted User Data messages beginning with the first
unacknowledged message with FSN greater than FSNC.
(b) any not transmitted User Data messages.
Then M2PA SHALL send the Retrieval Complete indication to MTP3.
For emergency changeover, MTP3 retrieves only the unsent messages
for transmission on the alternate link(s). If M2PA receives a
Retrieval Request and FSNC request with no FSNC value, or with an
invalid FSNC, then M2PA SHALL retrieve from its buffers in order and
deliver to MTP3:
(a) any not transmitted User Data messages.
Then M2PA SHALL send the Retrieval Complete indication to MTP3.
Note: For the Japanese version of MTP defined in JT-Q704 [JT-Q704],
MTP3 retrieves both unsent and unacknowledged messages for
transmission on the alternate link(s). In this version of MTP, if
M2PA receives a Retrieval Request and FSNC request with no FSNC value,
or with an invalid FSNC, then M2PA SHALL retrieve from its buffers in
order and deliver to MTP3:
(a) any transmitted but unacknowledged User Data messages.
(b) any not transmitted User Data messages.
Then M2PA SHALL send the Retrieval Complete indication to MTP3.
4.2.6.1. Multiple User Data Streams and Changeover
The changeover procedure makes it problematic for M2PA to have
multiple User Data streams in one direction for a link. Buffer
updating would have to be done for each User Data stream separately to
avoid duplication or loss of messages. But MTP3 provides for only one
XCO/XCA message for sending the last-received sequence number.
Even with sequence numbering of User Data messages at the M2PA
layer, it is necessary to perform buffer updating on each stream.
Since the M2PA messages would be delivered over multiple streams,
there could be a gap in the M2PA sequence numbers at the receiving end
when the changeover procedure begins. If only the M2PA sequence
number is used in the XCO/XCA message, there would be a possibility of
losing the messages in the gap, or duplicating messages after the gap.
M2PA links with multiple User Data streams would be possible if a
multiple-BSNT XCO/XCA message is defined in MTP3, or MTP3 allows
multiple XCO/XCA messages (one for each User Data stream) to be sent
during a changeover. This is beyond the scope of this document.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 33
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
4.3. SCTP Considerations
Some M2PA procedures MAY be affected by the use of SCTP as a
transport layer. These considerations are discussed in this section.
4.3.1. SCTP Slow Start
SCTP contains a slow start algorithm to control the amount of data
being injected into the network. The algorithm allows SCTP to probe
the network to determine the available capacity. The algorithm is
invoked when transmission begins on an association, after a
sufficiently long idle period, or after repairing loss detected by the
SCTP retransmission timer.
It is possible that transmission of M2PA messages MAY be delayed by
SCTP slow start under certain conditions, including the following:
(a) Link Alignment. Link alignment takes place after an
association is established. SCTP invokes the slow start
algorithm since transmission is beginning on the association.
(b) Changeover. Messages are retrieved from one link (association)
and transferred to another for transmission. If the second
link had previously been idle, or is in the process of link
alignment, SCTP MAY invoke the slow start algorithm.
(c) Path failure (multi-homing). If SCTP switches from a failed
path to a new path, and the new path had previously been idle,
SCTP MAY invoke the slow start algorithm.
(d) Reduced traffic volume. Any time that M2PA sends a low volume
of traffic on a link and then the volume increases, SCTP MAY
invoke the slow start algorithm.
Programmers SHOULD be aware of this condition and how it MAY affect
M2PA performance. In some cases, it MAY be possible to avoid the
negative effects of slow start. For example, the Link Status Proving
messages sent during the proving period MAY be used to complete slow
start before the link is placed in service.
5. Examples of M2PA Procedures
In general, messages passed between MTP3 and M2PA are the same as
those passed between MTP3 and MTP2. M2PA interprets messages from
MTP3 and sends the appropriate message to SCTP. Likewise, messages
from SCTP are used to generate a meaningful message to MTP3.
Note that throughout this section, the primitives between MTP3 and
M2PA are named using the MTP terminology [Q.700, Q.701, Q.702, Q.703,
Q.704, Q.705]. Communications between M2PA and SCTP are named using
SCTP terminology.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 34
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
5.1. Link Initialization (Alignment)
An example of the message flow to bring an SS7 link in service is
shown below. Alignment is done by both ends of the link. To simplify
the diagram, alignment is shown on one end only. It is assumed in
this example that SCTP has been initialized.
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Associate . . . .
. ------------> . . .
. . . . . .
. . (SCTP Association . .
. . .procedure) . . .
. . . . . .
. Communication Up Communication Up .
. <------------ ------------> .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Out of Service . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
Emergency OR. . . . .
Emergency Ceases . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . . .
Start . . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Alignment . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. Start timer T2 . . .
. . . . . .
. . . Link Status Alignment .
. <------------------------------------ .
. . . . . .
. Stop timer T2 . . .
. Start timer T4 . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 12. Example: Link Initialization - Alignment
Proving period begins. (Messages from remote end not shown.)
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 35
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Link Status Proving . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. Timer T4 expires . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 13. Example: Link Initialization - Proving
Send Link Status Ready until the remote end completes its proving
period.
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Start timer T1 . . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Ready . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . Link Status Ready .
. <------------------------------------ .
. . . . . .
. Stop timer T1 . . .
. . . . . .
In Service . . . In Service .
<------------ . . ------------>
. . . . . .
Figure 14. Example: Link Initialization - In Service
At this point, MTP3 MAY begin sending data messages.
5.2. Message Transmission and Reception
Messages are transmitted using the Data Request primitive from MTP3
to M2PA. The diagram shows the case where the Link is In Service.
The message is passed from MTP3 of the source to MTP3 of the
destination.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 36
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
Message for . . . . .
transmission. . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . . .
. Send . . . .
. (Data Message) . . .
. ------------> . . .
. . . . . .
. . (SCTP sends message) . .
. . . . . :
. . . Receive . .
. . . ------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Received message
. . . . ------------>
. . . . . .
Figure 15. Example: Message Transmission and Reception
5.3. Link Status Indication
If SCTP sends a Communication Lost primitive to M2PA, M2PA notifies
MTP3 that the link is out of service. MTP3 responds in its usual way.
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Communication Lost . . .
. <------------ . . .
. . . . . .
Out of Service . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 16. Example: Link Status Indication
5.4. Link Status Message (Processor Outage)
This example shows how M2PA responds to a local processor outage.
M2PA sends a Link Status message to its peer. The peer M2PA notifies
MTP3 of the outage. MTP3 can then follow the processor outage
procedures in Q.703 through Q.704 [Q.703, Q.704].
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 37
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. M2PA detects . . . .
. Local Processor . . . .
. Outage . . . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status . . . .
. Processor Outage . . .
. ------------> . . .
. . . . . .
. . (SCTP sends message) . .
. . . . . .
. . . Receive . .
. . . ------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Remote Processor
. . . . Outage .
. . . . ------------>
. . . . . .
. Link Status . . . .
. Processor Outage . . .
. Ended . . . .
. ------------> . . .
. . . . . .
. . (SCTP sends message) . .
. . . . . .
. . . Receive . .
. . . ------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Remote Processor
. . . . Outage Ceases .
. . . . ------------>
. . . . . .
Figure 17. Example: Link Status Message - Processor Outage
5.5. Level 2 Flow Control
This illustrates the Level 2 Flow Control procedure. In the first
diagram, congestion ceases before timer T6 expires. The second
diagram shows the case where T6 expires.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 38
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Implementation dependent. . .
. determination of M2PA . . .
. receive congestion onset. . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Busy . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Start .
. . . . Timer T6 .
. . . . . .
. Implementation dependent. . .
. determination of M2PA . . .
. receive congestion abatement . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Busy Ended . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Stop .
. . . . Timer T6 .
. . . . . .
. Implementation dependent. . .
. determination of M2PA . . .
. receive congestion onset. . .
. . . . . .
. Link Status Busy . . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
. . . . Start .
. . . . Timer T6 .
. . . . : .
. . . . : .
. . . . Timer T6 .
. . . . Expires .
. . . . .
. . Link Status Out of Service .
. <-----------------------------------. .
. . . . . .
. . . . Out of Service
. . . . ------------>
. . . . . .
Figure 18. Example: Level 2 Flow Control
5.6. MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion
In this example, M2PA notifies MTP3 of congestion onset and
abatement. The notification includes the congestion level, if there
are levels of congestion defined.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 39
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Implementation dependent. . .
. determination of M2PA . . .
. transmit congestion . . .
. onset (level) . . .
. . . . . .
Congestion Indication . . . .
(level) . . . . .
. <------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
. Implementation dependent. . .
. determination of M2PA . . .
. transmit congestion . . .
. abatement (level) . . .
. . . . . .
Congestion Indication . . . .
(level) . . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 19. Example: MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion
5.7. Link Deactivation
The MTP3 can request that a SS7-IP link be taken out of service.
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
Stop . . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . .
. Link Status Out of Service . .
. ------------------------------------> .
. . . . . .
Out of Service . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 20. Example: Link Deactivation
5.8. Link Changeover
In this example, MTP3 performs a changeover because the link went
out of service. MTP3 selects a different link to retransmit the
unacknowledged and unsent messages.
Note that in this example, the sequence numbers and messages
requested by MTP3 are sent from SCTP to M2PA in the Communication Lost
primitive. In general, the retrieval of sequence numbers and messages
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 40
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
is implementation dependent.
MTP3 M2PA SCTP SCTP M2PA MTP3
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
. . . . . .
. Communication Lost . . .
. <------------ . . .
. . . . . .
Out of Service . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Retrieve BSNT . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . . .
BSNT Confirmation . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
XCO (BSNT) on another link . . .
------------------------------------------------------------>
. . . . . .
. . . . Retrieve BSNT
. . . . <------------
. . . . . .
. . . . BSNT Confirmation
. . . . ------------>
. . . . . .
. . . . . XCA (BSNT)
<------------------------------------------------------------
. . . . . .
Retrieval Request . . . .
and FSNC . . . . .
------------> . . . .
. . . . . .
Retrieved Message . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. : . . . . .
. : . . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Retrieval Complete . . . .
<------------ . . . .
. . . . . .
Send messages on another link. . . .
. . . . . .
Figure 21. Example: Link Changeover
6. Security
M2PA is designed to carry signalling messages for telephony
services. As such, M2PA MUST involve the security needs of several
parties: the end users of the services, the network providers, and the
applications involved. Additional requirements MAY come from local
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 41
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
regulation. While having some overlapping security needs, any
security solution SHOULD fulfill all of the different parties' needs.
6.1. Threats
There is no quick-fix, one-size-fits-all solution for security. As
a transport protocol, M2PA has the following security objectives:
- Availability of reliable and timely user data transport.
- Integrity of user data transport.
- Confidentiality of user data.
M2PA runs on top of SCTP. SCTP [RFC 2960] provides certain
transport related security features, such as:
- Blind Denial of Service Attacks
- Flooding
- Masquerade
- Improper Monopolization of Services
When M2PA is running in professionally managed corporate or service
provider network, it is reasonable to expect that this network
includes an appropriate security policy framework. The "Site Security
Handbook" [RFC 2196] SHOULD be consulted for guidance.
When the network in which M2PA runs involves more than one party
(e.g., a non-private network), it MAY NOT be reasonable to expect that
all parties have implemented security in a sufficient manner. In such
a case, it is RECOMMENDED that IPSEC be used to ensure confidentiality
of user payload. Consult "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol" [RFC 2401] for more information on configuring IPSEC
services.
6.2. Protecting Confidentiality
Particularly for mobile users, the requirement for confidentiality
MAY include the masking of IP addresses and ports. In this case
application-level encryption is not sufficient. IPSEC ESP SHOULD be
used instead. Regardless of which level performs the encryption, the
IPSEC ISAKMP service SHOULD be used for key management.
7. IANA Considerations
7.1. SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier
The SCTP (and TCP) Registered User Port Number Assignment for M2PA
is 3565.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 42
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
The value assigned by IANA for the Payload Protocol Identifier in
the SCTP Payload Data chunk is
M2PA 5
The SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier is included in each SCTP Data
chunk, to indicate which protocol the SCTP is carrying. This Payload
Protocol Identifier is not directly used by SCTP but MAY be used by
certain network entities to identify the type of information being
carried in a Data chunk.
The User Adaptation peer MAY use the Payload Protocol Identifier as
a way of determining additional information about the data being
presented to it by SCTP.
7.2. M2PA Protocol Extensions
This protocol MAY be extended through IANA in three ways:
- through definition of additional message classes,
- through definition of additional message types, and
- through definition of additional message parameters.
The definition and use of new message classes, types, and
parameters is an integral part of SIGTRAN adaptation layers. Thus,
these extensions are assigned by IANA through an IETF Consensus action
[RFC 2434].
The proposed extension MUST in no way adversely affect the general
working of the protocol.
7.2.1. IETF Defined Message Classes
The documentation for a new message class MUST include the
following information:
(a) A long and short name for the message class.
(b) A detailed description of the purpose of the message class.
7.2.2. IETF Defined Message Types
Documentation of the message type MUST contain the following
information:
(a) A long and short name for the new message type.
(b) A detailed description of the structure of the message.
(c) A detailed definition and description of the intended use of
each field within the message.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 43
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
(d) A detailed procedural description of the use of the new message
type within the operation of the protocol.
(e) A detailed description of error conditions when receiving this
message type.
When an implementation receives a message type which it does not
support, it MUST discard the message.
7.2.3. IETF-defined Parameter Extension
Documentation of the message parameter MUST contain the following
information:
(a) Name of the parameter type.
(b) Detailed description of the structure of the parameter field.
(c) Detailed definition of each component of the parameter value.
(d) Detailed description of the intended use of this parameter
type, and an indication of whether and under what circumstances
multiple instances of this parameter type MAY be found within
the same message type.
8. Timers
Recommended timer values are as follows:
Table 7. Recommended Timer Values
+-----------------+--------------------------------+
| | (seconds) |
| Timer +----------------------+---------+
| | Range | Default |
+-----------------+----------------------+---------+
|T1 (Ready) | 40 - 50 | 45 |
|T2 (Not Aligned) | 5 - 150 | 60 |
|T3 (Aligned) | 1.0 - 1.5 | 1.0 |
|T4 (Normal) | 7.5 - 9.5 | 8 |
|T4 (Emerg) | 0.400 - 0.600 | 0.500 |
|T6 (Busy) | 3 - 6 | 4.5 |
|T7 (Ack) | 0.5 - 2.0 | 1.0 |
+-----------------+----------------------+---------+
|Status_Interval | implementation dependent |
|Proving_Rate | implementation dependent |
+-----------------+--------------------------------+
Notes
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 44
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
References
Q.700.
ITU, "Introduction to CCITT Signalling System No. 7," ITU-T
Recommendation Q.700, ITU-T Telecommunication Standardization
Sector of ITU, Geneva (March 1993). [Informative]
Q.703.
ITU, "Signalling System No. 7 - Signalling Link," ITU-T
Recommendation Q.703, ITU-T Telecommunication Standardization
Sector of ITU, Geneva (March 1993). [Normative]
Q.701.
ITU, "Functional Description of the Message Transfer Part (MTP)
of Signalling System No. 7," ITU-T Recommendation Q.701, ITU-T
Telecommunication Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva (March
1993). [Informative]
Q.702.
ITU, "Signalling Data Link," ITU-T Recommendation Q.702, ITU-T
Telecommunication Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva (March
1993). [Informative]
Q.704.
ITU, "Message Transfer Part - Signalling Network Functions and
Messages," ITU-T Recommendation Q.704, ITU-T Telecommunication
Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva (March 1993). [Normative]
Q.705.
ITU, "Signalling System No. 7 - Signalling Network Structure,"
ITU-T Recommendation Q.705, ITU-T Telecommunication
Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva (March 1993).
[Informative]
T1.111.
ANSI, "Signalling System No. 7 - Message Transfer Part," ANSI
T1.111, American National Standards Institue (1992). [Normative]
RFC 2719.
L. Ong, I. Rytina, M. Holdrege, L. Coene, M.-A. Garcia, C. Sharp,
I. Juhasz, H. P. Lin and HannsJ. Schwarzbauer, "Framework
Architecture for Signaling Transport," RFC 2719, The Internet
Society (October, 1999). [Informative]
RFC 2960.
R. Stewart, Q. Xie, K. Morneault, C. Sharp, H. J. Schwarzbauer,
T. Taylor, I. Rytina, H. Kalla, L. Zhang and V. Paxson, "Stream
Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)," RFC 2960, The Internet
Society (February 2000). [Normative]
RFC 791.
, "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program - Protocol
Specification," RFC 791, The Internet Society (September 1981).
[Normative]
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 45
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
RFC 2119.
S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels," RFC 2119 - BCP 14, Internet Engineering Task Force
(March 1997). [Normative]
Q.2140.
ITU, "B-ISDN ATM Adaptation Layer - Service Specific Coordination
Function for Signalling at the Network Node Interface (SSCF at
NNI)," ITU-T Recommendation Q.2140, ITU-T Telecommunication
Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva (February 1996).
[Normative]
Q.2210.
ITU, "Message Transfer Part Level 3 Functions and Messages Using
the Services of ITU-T Recommendation Q.2140," ITU-T
Recommendation Q.2210, ITU-T Telecommunication Standardization
Sector of ITU, Geneva (July 1996). [Normative]
M2UA.
K. Morneault, R. Dantu, G. Sidebottom, B. Bidulock and J. Heitz,
"Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP2) - User
Adaptation Layer," RFC 3331, Internet Engineering Task Force -
Signalling Transport Working Group (September, 2002).
[Informative]
JT-Q704.
TTC, "Message Transfer Part - Signalling Network Functions and
Messages," TTC Standard JT-Q704, Telecommunication Technology
Committee (TTC) (April 28, 1992). [Normative]
RFC 2196.
B. Y. Frazer, "Site Security Handbook," RFC 2196, Internet
Engineering Task Force (September 1997). [Normative]
RFC 2401.
S. Kent, R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol," RFC 2401, Internet Engineering Task Force (November
1998). [Normative]
RFC 2434.
T. Narten, H. T. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
Considerations Section in RFCs," RFC 2434, The Internet Society
(October, 1998). [Normative]
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following for their valuable
comments and suggestions: Brian Tatum, Jeff Copley, Monique Bernard,
Wayne Davis, Cliff Thomas, Ian Rytina, Al Varney.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 46
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Author's Addresses
Brian Bidulock Tel: +1-780-490-1141
OpenSS7 Corporation Email: bidulock@openss7.org
1469 Jeffreys Crescent URL: http//www.openss7.org/
Edmonton, AB T6L 6T1
Canada
Tom George Tel: +1-972-519-3168
Alcatel USA, Inc. EMail: Tom.George@alcatel.com
1000 Coit Road
Plano, TX 75075
USA
Ram Dantu, Ph.D. Tel: +1-214-291-1111
Netrake Corporation EMail: rdantu@netrake.com
3000 Technology Drive, Suite 100
Plano 75074
USA
Malleswar Kalla Tel: +1-973-829-5212
Telcordia Technologies EMail: kalla@research.telcordia.com
MCC 1J211R
445 South Street
Morristown, NJ 07960
USA
Hanns Juergen Schwarzbauer Tel: +49-89-722-24236
SIEMENS AG HannsJuergen.Schwarzbauer@icn.siemens.de
Hofmannstr. 51
81359 Munich
Germany
Greg Sidebottom
gregside consulting EMail: gregside@rogers.com
Kanata, Ontario
Canada
Ken Morneault Tel: +1-703-484-3323
Cisco Systems Inc. EMail: kmorneau@cisco.com
13615 Dulles Technology Drive
Herndon, VA 20171
USA
This Internet draft expires July, 2003.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 47
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
List of Tables
Table 1 Two IPSPs with Two IP Addresses Each .................. 21
Table 2 One IPSP Connected to Two IPSPs ....................... 22
Table 3 Multiple Associations Between Two IP Addresses ........ 23
Table 4 Recommended Timer Values .............................. 26
Table 5 Recommended Timer Values .............................. 28
Table 6 Recommended Timer Values .............................. 30
Table 7 Recommended Timer Values .............................. 44
List of Illustrations
Figure 1 M2PA Symmetrical Peer-to-Peer Architecture ........... 5
Figure 2 M2PA in IP Signalling Gateway ........................ 6
Figure 3 M2PA in IP Signalling Gateway ........................ 10
Figure 4 M2UA in IP Signalling Gateway ........................ 10
Figure 5 Common Message Header ................................ 11
Figure 6 M2PA-specific Message Header ......................... 13
Figure 7 M2PA Link State Transition Diagram ................... 18
Figure 8 M2PA Association State Transition Diagram ............ 19
Figure 9 Two IPSPs with Two IP Addresses Each ................. 21
Figure 10 One IPSP Connected to Two IPSPs ..................... 22
Figure 11 Multiple Associations Between Two IP Addresses ...... 23
Figure 12 Example: Link Initialization - Alignment ............ 35
Figure 13 Example: Link Initialization - Proving .............. 36
Figure 14 Example: Link Initialization - In Service ........... 36
Figure 15 Example: Message Transmission and Reception ......... 37
Figure 16 Example: Link Status Indication ..................... 37
Figure 17 Example: Link Status Message - Processor Outage ..... 38
Figure 18 Example: Level 2 Flow Control ....................... 39
Figure 19 Example: MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion ............ 40
Figure 20 Example: Link Deactivation .......................... 40
Figure 21 Example: Link Changeover ............................ 41
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 48
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Table of Contents
Status of this Memo ........................................... 1
Abstract ...................................................... 2
1 Introduction ................................................ 2
1.1 Scope ..................................................... 2
1.2 Change History ............................................ 2
1.2.1 Changes from Version 0.6 to Version 0.7 ................. 3
1.3 Terminology ............................................... 3
1.4 Abbreviations ............................................. 4
1.5 Conventions ............................................... 4
1.6 Signalling Transport Architecture ......................... 4
1.6.1 Point Code Representation ............................... 6
1.7 Services Provided by M2PA ................................. 6
1.7.1 Support for MTP Level 2 / MTP Level 3 interface boundary
............................................................ 6
1.7.2 Support for peer-to-peer communication .................. 6
1.8 Functions Provided by M2PA ................................ 7
1.8.1 Support of MTP3/MTP2 Primitives ......................... 7
1.8.2 MTP2 Functionality ...................................... 7
1.8.3 Mapping of SS7 and IP Entities .......................... 7
1.8.4 SCTP Stream Management .................................. 7
1.8.5 Retention of MTP3 in the SS7 Network .................... 7
1.9 Definition of the M2PA Boundaries ......................... 7
1.9.1 Definition of the M2PA / MTP Level 3 boundary ........... 8
1.9.2 Definition of the Lower Layer Boundary between M2PA and
SCTP ....................................................... 9
1.10 Differences Between M2PA and M2UA ........................ 9
2 Protocol Elements ........................................... 11
2.1 Common Message Header ..................................... 11
2.1.1 Version ................................................. 12
2.1.2 Spare ................................................... 12
2.1.3 Message Class ........................................... 12
2.1.4 Message Type ............................................ 12
2.1.5 Message Length .......................................... 12
2.2 M2PA Header ............................................... 12
2.2.1 Backward Sequence Number ................................ 13
2.2.2 Forward Sequence Number ................................. 13
2.3 M2PA Messages ............................................. 13
2.3.1 User Data ............................................... 13
2.3.2 Link Status ............................................. 15
3 M2PA Link State Control ..................................... 16
4 Procedures .................................................. 19
4.1 Procedures to Support MTP2 Features ....................... 19
4.1.1 Signal Unit Format, Delimitation, Acceptance ............ 19
4.1.2 MTP and SCTP Entities ................................... 20
4.1.3 Link Alignment .......................................... 23
4.1.4 Processor Outage ........................................ 26
4.1.5 Level 2 Flow Control .................................... 27
4.1.6 Error Monitoring ........................................ 28
4.1.7 Transmission and Reception Priorities ................... 28
4.1.8 M2PA Version Control .................................... 28
4.2 Procedures to Support the MTP3/MTP2 Interface ............. 29
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 49
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
4.2.1 Sending and receiving messages .......................... 29
4.2.2 Link activation and restoration ......................... 31
4.2.3 Link deactivation ....................................... 31
4.2.4 Flush Buffers, Continue ................................. 31
4.2.5 MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion ......................... 31
4.2.6 Changeover .............................................. 31
4.3 SCTP Considerations ....................................... 34
4.3.1 SCTP Slow Start ......................................... 34
5 Examples of M2PA Procedures ................................. 34
5.1 Link Initialization (Alignment) ........................... 35
5.2 Message Transmission and Reception ........................ 36
5.3 Link Status Indication .................................... 37
5.4 Link Status Message (Processor Outage) .................... 37
5.5 Level 2 Flow Control ...................................... 38
5.6 MTP3 Signalling Link Congestion ........................... 39
5.7 Link Deactivation ......................................... 40
5.8 Link Changeover ........................................... 40
6 Security .................................................... 41
6.1 Threats ................................................... 42
6.2 Protecting Confidentiality ................................ 42
7 IANA Considerations ......................................... 42
7.1 SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier .......................... 42
7.2 M2PA Protocol Extensions .................................. 43
7.2.1 IETF Defined Message Classes ............................ 43
7.2.2 IETF Defined Message Types .............................. 43
7.2.3 IETF-defined Parameter Extension ........................ 44
8 Timers ...................................................... 44
Notes ......................................................... 44
References .................................................... 45
Acknowledgments ............................................... 46
Author's Addresses ............................................ 47
List of Tables ................................................ 48
List of Illustrations ......................................... 48
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 50
Internet-Draft M2PA January 7, 2003
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and
distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing
Internet standards in which case the procedure for copyrights defined
in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to
translate into languages other than English.
The limited permission granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on
an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN
WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
B. Bidulock, et al Version 0.7 Page 51
|
Documentation