Gustavo,
I think you're confusing the general function of an STP with the
external signaling network architecture used by ANSI countries.
All incumbent networks in Brazil make heavy usage of STPs.
They have lots of TDM switches, and to avoid a full mesh of signaling
links between all TDM switches that have voice trunks between them, STPs
are used to aggregate SS7 traffic.
Also STPs are also used as billing entities and for resolving LNP in
some carriers.
I'm pretty sure STPs have lots of usage in other ITU countries.
However they don't have a fully separate signaling network, 64kbps SS7
links make maximum usage of semi permanent call setups, specially for
interconnects with other carriers (using bearer channels of existing E1
voice trunks).
However competitive carriers use redundant soft switch architecture
don't need STPs, since signaling flows through the IP network, without
explicit signaling channels.
I fell more important than the capability of Asterisk performing as an
STP, is much more important full linkset functionality as a regular
signaling point. For instance, the following scenario can't be
implemented with libss7 today:
Asterisk --x-- STP A ---x--- Switch1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
STP B
Where Asterisk has voice CICs with all 8 switches, and all signaling
needs to be shared across a pair of signaling links, one with each STP.
Specially with E1s with all 8 switches can't fit on a single Asterisk box.
Marcelo Pacheco
On 03/15/12 14:39, Gustavo Mársico wrote:
On Mar 15, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Michael Mueller wrote:
STPs in ITU-land are awkward since ITU voice networks are a mesh of
E1 with signaling in the same bundles as the voice
in ANSI-land, the STP was incorporated and mandated by two large and
powerful monopolies: BC and ATT; signaling became de-coupled from the
voice and traveling in a separate network connected by hierarchy of
mated pair STPs
putting an STP or an STP-like invention in an typical ITU network
raises questions about commercial viability: having a central STP
might raise your E1 charges because they travel over longer distances
- this raises monthly charges in many places; might be cheaper to
connect locally - but then you have increased monthly charges for
colo space
there is conceptual dissonance between STPs and ITU networks - STPs
require the signaling be separate from the voice, and ITU mesh
networks are built around signaling and voice channels traveling in
the same bundles of wire (i've just restated my first 2 paragraphs);
decoupling signaling means using an entire E1 for a single signal
channel; this usually causes despair to the typical ITU ss7 engineer
but is business as usual to the ANSI counterpart
This is not quite correct. CALA region mostly uses separate E1 for
signalling and media when a STP is used. If STP is not required, some
telco choose to separate and others don't. As the same as ANSI does.
In fact, it's a matter of how the people wants to make it work.
the cheapest STP I know of is the PT Segway; maybe you can get a
Tekelec Eagle; I'm not aware of any Linux based DIY STPs; ss7box
started as an STP but evolved away from the function as there was
little need for a low-end STP in ANSI-land and zero need for it in
ITU-land
ss7box supports Asterisk box clustering around a single point code
with CIC routing; clustering might be something you want to
investigate - you'd have to examine the technical, commercial, and
incumbent connection policies to see if it would help you build an IP
voice network with fewer connections to the incumbent telco network
using such a clustering function
you asked a complicated question, or I've turned a simple question
into a complicated one - both are plausible
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Rodrigo Ricardo Passos
<rodrigopas...@gmail.com <mailto:rodrigopas...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Michael,
Can you explain more?
Here, in Brazil, the standard is ITU. I think it isn´t possible
because ITU is used in all telcos.
Em 15/03/2012 12:25, Michael Mueller escreveu:
connecting a mated pair of STPs to an ANSI network as a peer has
more requirements than connecting an SSP; ITU STP are less
common so connection requirements might be more variable
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Rodrigo Ricardo Passos
<rodrigopas...@gmail.com <mailto:rodrigopas...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Gustavo,
Do you know Yate? Knows if Yate can be used in place of
asterisk?
I know that this list is about Asterisk SS7, but I think
that this question doesn´t bad.
Regards,
Rodrigo
Em 14/03/2012 16:55, Gustavo Mársico escreveu:
There is no pure STP implementation on libss7 or chan_ss7.
Modules cannot send TFA, TFP, support STP timers,
etc. Today, all you can do is routing based in the
extensions, but that's not STP function.
However, I know that some efforts were made on libss7 and
the last time I checked looked promising. I'll try to find
what's going on there.
Regards
Gustavo
On Mar 14, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Rodrigo Ricardo Passos wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question of how can I create STPs Boxes with
Asterisk in my network?
My project includes a creation of network with asterisk
SPs and STPs and my initial idea is a implementation of
these boxes using TDMoE. So, create two boxes like STP e
another's boxes like SP.
All signalization will pass to both STPs. Anyone knows if
my scenario will be one scenario with a real STP boxes or
this will never STP ambient?
Other question is, if this last question is false, how can
I create this ambient with asterisk?
Best Regards,
Rodrigo
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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 byhttp://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 <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 byhttp://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 <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
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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
