Re: GMPLS Issue - Bandwidth Encoding

[Lou Berger <lberger@movaz.com>]

At 10:59 AM 12/18/2001, Ben Mack-Crane wrote:

>The following issue raised 10/29/01 has not been addressed:

Ben,
         Again, this has something that has been discussed many times.  My 
reading is that we have "rough consensus".

If you disagree, please take it up with the WG chair.

Lou

> > >4) In the "Bandwidth Encoding" section it states "For non-packet LSPs, it
> > >    is useful to define discrete values to identify the bandwidth of the
> > >    LSP."  For SONET/SDH this is unnecessary given the Signal Type is
> > >    provided.  For the other non-packet LSP types (Lambda and Fiber)
> > >    it is not clear that all the values cited in the example are relevant
> > >    (for example, a DS0 lambda would seem wasteful...).
> >
> > >    This is confusing, and should be clarified.  In fact, a 
> description of
> > >    exactly why this field is required is needed.
> >
> > We've gone over this text multiple times.  Do you have any suggested 
> wording.
> >
>
>I would gladly suggest wording if I understood the use for this.  It has 
>no use
>for Packet, PDH, SDH/SONET, or "Digital Wrapper," so I assume it is for 
>Lambda
>or Fiber.  However, several of the examples are not appropriate for this.
>Perhaps this should be moved to a technology specific document since it is
>not really general anyway.