Howdy, All the big vendors do it, in an NGN (soft switch + media gateway) solution. When you have the traditional large TDM switches, usually each switch can handle 8192 E1/T1 trunks or more. Sure enough, in such configurations, you can't split a point code between switches, because each switch have all needed redundancy in itself typically operating 365x24. But in the NGN world, you typically have no larger than 32E1 media gateways, usually 8 or 16 E1 MGWs. Asterisk is voip (NGN), however it wasn't designed with true soft switch features, for instance, a carrier grade NGN solution not only can handle a multi gateway SS7 interconnect, but also can handle an ISDN T1 bundle with the primary/secondary data link on separate media gateways. That's because typical soft switch controls all call setup/billing functions centralized, usually in lock setup with a backup soft switch, instead of distributing those functions between the media gateways. That's the MEGACO way of doing things (media gateways are robots that receive detailed instructions of what to do from the SS). Of course Cisco does it diferently, translating ISUP to ISDN, relaying ISDN to the media gateway via IP, so the gateways do all the billing, and call setup, considering they receive Q.931 messages and handle those. The correct solution considering Asterisk can't (and won't soon be able) to do a 32+ E1 on a single CPU configuration, considering medium sized carrier applications, is to have complete CIC range based ISUP masquerade. You can work around using more point codes, but that's certainly sub optimal. Marcelo Pacheco Technical Director M2J Communications voip me wrote: > Hi, > > I think its the best solution because handling complexity of > distributed MTP3 (specially network part) is a mess, even giant class > 4/5 switch makers hadn't done it. > > Mathew, by "like they do with a real MTP2 link, except it's just over > an IP based protocol" you mean M2UA or you have your own protocol? > > Regards. > -- > M. Shokuie Nia > > 2009/1/14 Matthew Fredrickson <creslin at digium.com > <mailto:creslin at digium.com>> > > Mehdi Shirazi wrote: > >>> Although I am not using true M3UA and sigtran protocols right now, > >>> conceptually, this is almost exactly what we are doing, except > we will > >>> support multiple SGs to each ASP as well. > > > >>> Matthew Fredrickson > >>> Digium, Inc. > > > > For multiple SGs to each ASP support am I correct : > > "with M3UA we need one point code for each SG but with M2UA we > need only one point code (assigned in ASP ?) and it seems > implementing M2UA is easier than M3UA" (leaving MTP3 and ISUP part > unchanged) > > Like I said, this is basically what I'm doing. The way the links look > to the MTP3 on each box is exactly like they do with a real MTP2 link, > except it's just over an IP based protocol. > > Matthew Fredrickson > Digium, Inc. > > _______________________________________________ > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by > http://www.api-digital.com-- <http://www.api-digital.com--/> > > asterisk-ss7 mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-ss7 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- > > asterisk-ss7 mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-ss7
|