[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Small issue on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sdh-00.txt
Hi all,
That's right Greg, thanks.
I am guilty, I introduced this bug when I updated the text I believe. Sorry.
I'll correct it.
Kind regards,
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Bernstein, Greg [mailto:GregB@ciena.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 5:33 PM
To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; mpls@UU.NET
Subject: Small issue on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sdh-00.txt
Hi in the draft draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sdh-00.txt it says:
In case of any type of contiguous concatenation (e.g. standard or
arbitrary concatenation), only one label appears in the Label
field. That label is the lowest signal of the contiguously
concatenated signal. By lowest signal we mean the one having the
lowest label when compared as integer values, i.e. the first
component signal of the concatenated signal encountered when
descending the tree.
In case of virtual concatenation, the explicit ordered list of all
labels in the concatenation is given. Each label indicates a
component of the virtually concatenated signal.
This does not reflect the intent of arbitrary concatenation- arbitrary, size
and placement of timeslots. Otherwise the main benefit of arbitrary
concatenation, preventing re-grooming is lost. Corrected text could read:
In the case of standard contiguous, only one label appears in the Label
field. That label is the lowest signal of the standard contiguously
concatenated signal. By lowest signal we mean the one having the
lowest label when compared as integer values, i.e. the first
component signal of the concatenated signal encountered when
descending the tree.
In the cases of arbitrary or virtual concatenation, the explicit ordered
list of all
labels in the concatenation is given. Each label indicates a
component of the arbitrary or virtually concatenated signal.
Greg B.
Dr. Greg M. Bernstein, Senior Scientist, Ciena
New phone: (510) 573-2237