[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.
-------