[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [IP-Optical] concatenation extensions in sonet/sdh
- To: 'Stephen Trowbridge' <sjtrowbridge@lucent.com>, "Bernstein, Greg" <GregB@ciena.com>
- Subject: RE: [IP-Optical] concatenation extensions in sonet/sdh
- From: "Mannie, Eric" <Eric.Mannie@ebone.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:42:04 +0200
- Cc: 'Zhi-Wei Lin' <zwlin@lucent.com>, 'Maarten Vissers' <mvissers@lucent.com>, Anup Tirumala <Anup@jasminenetworks.com>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, chickoo66@yahoo.com, ip-optical@lists.bell-labs.com, "t1x1.5" <t1x15@t1.org>, q11/15 <tsg15q11@itu.int>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 17 May 2001 13:43:17 -0700
- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com
Hello Ladies and Gentlemen,
>If the desire is to extend current SONET/SDH with an arbitrary
>concatenation feature, there is no problem to contribute to T1X1
>and/or ITU-T to propose this extension. This is the correct way to
>approach it. The INCORRECT way is to confuse the market by producing
>an IETF version of SONET/SDH specs that is different from T1X1/ITU-T.
Please note that the IETF is NOT producing any version of the SONET/SDH
specs. We should avoid such a misunderstanding because it is confusing the
market.
We are simply trying to define reasonable and simple signalling elements to
control some TDM features. These TDM features can be some that were
specified by ITU-T or T1X1, and/or some that are a common practice in the
industry (like transparency), and/or some that we think/envision that will
be important to control in the future. That's called creativity and that's
really cool !
Kind regards,
Eric
Eric Mannie
EBONE (GTS)