[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lambda LSP establishment
John,
As always it takes some time to recognise the need for changes; I appreciate
that. If it is the intention that GMPLS is used to control the transport plane
consisting of PDH, SDH/SONET, pre-OTN and OTN then it would be logical that it
is based on the transport plane's definitions and terminology. The concept of
the MPLS FA isn't applicable for the mentioned technologies. Trying to stick to
it in GMPLS is causing confusion and most likely will cause problems in the
future. Let's prevent that latter to happen, by replacing the FA by the proper
transport plane concepts.
The same applies to the switching types TDM, LSC. These do not align with the
transport plane's layer network structure. They should be replaced by the proper
layer network types.
I expect that it will take a few months before this is resolved :-).
Regards,
Maarten
John Drake wrote:
>
> fortunately, this is just your opinion
and some others...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maarten Vissers [mailto:mvissers@lucent.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:31 PM
> To: manoj juneja
> Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Lambda LSP establishment
>
> Manoj,
>
> Forget the FA stuff, it is not appropriate in circuit networks. It only
> applies
> to MPLS. We should remove it when it is used in relation with PDH,
> SDH/SONET,
> OTN and pre-OTN. The text in sdh-sonet draft should state that if there is a
> LOVC link (IETF: link bundle/TE link) then the LOVC signals use a label with
> "00KLM".
>
> Regards,
>
> Maarten
>
> manoj juneja wrote:
> >
> > Hi Marteen,
> > The concept of FA is mentioned for SDH/SONET in gmpls-sdh
> > -sonet draft. It says that if u have a HOVC trail as a FA (advertized
> > as a link) then u can allocate the lower level signals in it by making
> > the higher bits of label as 0s (i.e. S and U}. This is fine for the same
> > technology. What about the case where the TDM LSP has to be tunneled
> through
> > the Lambda LSP ? What will be the form of label (i.e. {SUKLM} or lambda
> > etc.) ?
> >
> > Regards,
> > manoj.
> >
> > >From: Maarten Vissers <mvissers@lucent.com>
> > >To: manoj juneja <manojkumarjuneja@hotmail.com>
> > >CC: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> > >Subject: Re: Lambda LSP establishment
> > >Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:56:41 +0100
> > >
> > >Manoj,
> > >
> > >You refer to one wavelength to be available between A-E without
> wavelength
> > >conversion capability. This suggests that you operate at the OCh layer
> > >network.
> > >Then you specify the capacity of the 4 OCh link connections (A-B, B-C,
> C-D,
> > >D-E)
> > >to be "C". Say that C is about 10 Gbit/s. You then assume that there is a
> > >request for an OCh signal with capacity C/4 (e.g. 2.5 Gbit/s) between C
> and
> > >E.
> > >The result is that the OCh link connections C-D and D-E are transporting
> > >the OCh
> > >signal (of e.g. 2.5G). These OCh link connections are now in service and
> > >not
> > >longer available to an other OCh connection request. I.e. a request for
> an
> > >OCh
> > >connection between A and E will be rejected.
> > >
> > >FAs are not applicable in the circuit layers. IF there is a trail in
> server
> > >layer X, then there is a link in its client layer Y. X and Y are thus
> > >different
> > >layer networks and signals.
> > >
> > >If C-E is a "FA", then in an OTN the C-E connection would be an OCh trail
> > >supporting an ODUk (k=1 if OCh is 2G5) link with a single link
> connection.
> > >
> > >Note a FA in MPLS creates essentially a MPLS sublayer network. Such is
> not
> > >possible in the SDH/SONET, OTN, PDH or ATM technologies.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Maarten
> > >
> > >OCh link connections
> > >
> > >manoj juneja wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > If I have 5 nodes A, B, C, D and E connected as shown. Assume
> > > > that only one wavelength is available on the path A to E (no
> wavelength
> > > > conversion capability is there on the complete path). Let the capacity
> > > > of the wavelength be C. Further assume a request arrives for
> connection
> > > > from node C to E for a line capacity of C/4. This request will be
> > > > successful as we have available wavelength. Now If another request
> > > > comes at node A to establish another connection from node A to node E
> > > > via nodes {A,B,C,D,E} for a line capacity of C/4. Should this request
> > > > be successful as we have already allocated the wavelength ?
> > > >
> > > > If the previous connection from C to E of capacity C/4 had been
> > > > advertised as a FA, in that case will the IInd request succeed ?
> > > >
> > > > If the previous connection from C to E of capacity C/4 had not been
> > > > advertised as FA then what will be the fate of IInd connection ?
> > > >
> > > > A <--> B <---> C <----> D <---> <----> E
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > manoj.
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> > ><< mvissers.vcf >>
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
begin:vcard
n:Vissers;Maarten
tel;cell:+31 62 061 3945
tel;fax:+31 35 687 5976
tel;home:+31 35 526 5463
tel;work:+31 35 687 4270
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Optical Network Group;Lucent Technologies Nederland
version:2.1
email;internet:mvissers@lucent.com
title:Consulting Member of Technical Staff
adr;quoted-printable:;;Botterstraat 45=0D=0A=0D=0A;1271 XL Huizen;;;The Netherlands
fn:Maarten Vissers
end:vcard