Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Hi Michael,

the ASAP draft refers to the 'endpoint keep alive message' which is just, in
my opinion, another way to name a heartbeat mechanism :

2.2.7 ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message
This message is sent to a PE by the ENRP server has a "health" check.
If the transport level Heart Beat mechanism is insufficient (usually
this means that time outs are set for too long or heartbeats are not
frequent enough), this adds heartbeat messages with the goal of
determining health status in a more timely fashion.


Let summarize like this:
1_ there is a HB mechanism implemented at the SCTP layer, between the PU and
the PE
2_ another 'HB mechanism' exists between the PE and the NS, implemented in
RSerPool
Am I right ??

so,
have you only implemented the SCTP HB mechanism,
how are(is) these(this) mechanism(s) implemented,
what is the frequency for message sending,
do you have an idea of the overhead introduced by these mechanisms,
what's your opinion concerning their efficiency ?

Best regards
Tibo


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tuexen Michael"
<michael.tuexen AT siemens.com>
To: "'thibault Renier'"
<toubix AT kom.auc.dk>;

<rsplib-discussion AT sctp.de>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:36 PM
Subject: RE: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation


> Hi Tibo,
>
> what HB mechnism are you talking about? We use SCTP as the transport
> layer protocol. It has Heartbeats. The Heartbeat timer is a
> parameter of the SCTP implementation.
>
> There is no notion of Heartbeat Message in ASAP or ENRP.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>
> Michael Tuexen Tel.: +49 89 722 47210
> Siemens AG Fax: +49 89 722 48212
> ICN CP SE C 7 e-mail:
> Michael.Tuexen AT siemens.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thibault Renier
> [mailto:toubix AT kom.auc.dk]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:20 PM
> To:
> rsplib-discussion AT sctp.de
> Subject: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I am wondering how you implemented the heartbeat mechanism in your
RSerPool version. Here are some points I have in mind :
> - on which principles (push, pull) have you based the implementation of
this feature,
> - is there a heartbeat mechanism only between the PUs and the PEs,
> - is this implemented only at the SCTP layer,
> - what is the frequency of the messages sent and what is the overhead
introduced,
> - what do you think about the efficiency of the heartbeat mechanism(s)
implemented, could an implementation of an heartbeat mechanism at the SIP
layer (running on top of RSerPool) be a solution to potential problems when
implemented at the RSerPool (SCTP) layer ?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Regards
> Tibo
> _______________________________________________
> rsplib-discussion mailing list
> rsplib-discussion AT sctp.de
> http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/rsplib-discussion

---

• [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, thibault Renier, 01/22/2003
  • <Possible follow-up(s)>
  • RE: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, Tuexen Michael, 01/22/2003
    • Re: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, thibault Renier, 01/23/2003
  • RE: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, Tuexen Michael, 01/23/2003
    • RE: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, Thomas Dreibholz, 01/24/2003
      • Re: [RSPlib-Discusssion] heartbeat mechanism implementation, Michael Tüxen, 01/24/2003

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.