RE: Clarification Required regarding LSP Encoding Type

[Vishal Sharma <vishal@JasmineNetworks.com>]

Manoj,

Your understanding is correct. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: manoj juneja [mailto:manojkumarjuneja@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 3:08 PM
> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Clarification Required regarding LSP Encoding Type
> 
> 
> Hi All,
>         The draft "draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signalling-02.txt"
> defines different values for LSP encoding type. How does the
> implementation of a control plane differ if it receives the 
> LSP encoding 
> type packet/SDH/Digital Wrapper/Lamda/Fiber etc.
> 
> My understanding is that if the LSP encoding type is either 
> packet/ethernet, 
> then label is just a 32 bit integer (as we already have in 
> traditional 
> MPLS). But if LSP encoding type is SDH, SONET then the label 
> has to be in 
> the form of {S, U, K, L, M} format. If the LSP encoding type 
> is Lamda then 
> the label represents the lamda (specific frequency). If LSP 
> encoding type is 
> fiber, then label is the fiberId itself.  Please comment on 
> whether my 
> understanding is correct or I am overlooking something.


> Can u please describe a scenario in which the LSP encoding type
> will be used as a "digital wrapper" ?

I am not sure that an LSP encoding type of "digital wrapper" by
itself is enough. Looking at some of the Optical Transport Network
concepts, I would suspect that one would need an LSP encoding type
corresponding to the various layers defined in the OTN, but
I'll leave it to my colleagues from Lucent to comment on this.
(Maarten, Yuangang, Zhi?)

-Vishal