Even a full SS7 STP is an routing/load balancing/plus simple ACL security. STP is a level 3 functionality. Proxy is level 4 or level 7 functionality. Although some STPs come with extra funcionality that allows for portability lookups and billing independent of the participating switches, but calling that STP is wrong. Marcelo On 10/06/11 11:27, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > On 10/06/2011 09:23 AM, Chris Twombly wrote: >> I would like to hook up 3 Asterisk boxes to test SS7 functionality but I >> would like to send a bearer trunk between boxes and A and C and then >> send the signaling links to box B from A and C, respectively. This >> would make box B behave as an STP. Is this possible with the current >> version of chan_ss7 or libss7? >> >> Can anyone recommend using libss7 or chan_ss7 for particular reasons? >> Having briefly looked at both, it appears they both perform similar >> functions with chan_ss7 being a channel driver that has its own config >> file and libss7 being a library that has its configurations integrated >> with chan_dahdi.conf. Are they basically just two different approaches >> for implementing the same/similar functionality? > > No, there is no support in any current Asterisk SS7 solution for it > act as an STP. That's essentially an 'SS7 proxy', and Asterisk doesn't > have the ability to act that transparently. >
|