[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Label type to be used
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, dimitri papadimitriou wrote:
Hi Dimitri,
> the proposal as it read is:
> > [TDM, TDM] - label represents a TDM time slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH]
> > [PSC, TDM] - fully transparent signal: label represents a port
> > ("transparency" is defined in [GMPLS-SONET-SDH])
> > [PSC, TDM] - non-transparent signal: label represents a TDM time
> > slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH]
>
> the suggestion is also indicate the distinction for [TDM,TDM]:
> [TDM, TDM] - fully transparent signal: label represents a port
> ("transparency" is defined in [GMPLS-SONET-SDH])
> [TDM, TDM] - non-transparent signal: label represents a TDM time
> slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH]
> > [PSC, TDM] - fully transparent signal: label represents a port
> > ("transparency" is defined in [GMPLS-SONET-SDH])
> > [PSC, TDM] - non-transparent signal: label represents a TDM time
> > slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH]
Okay. Makes sense. Questions for all:
1) do you agree with this change?
2) if you implement GMPLS for [TDM, TDM] links, do you use port labels
or SUKLM labels for the fully transparent case?
- if SUKLM, would it be a hardship to change this?
Please respond by Sun Mar 28th, 5pm PST.
Thanks!
Kireeti.
-------