Re: VCn-xV LSPs terminology

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hi,

Yes, please check everything you can find in the lexicography draft, and
comment accordingly.

Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ong, Lyndon" <Lyong@Ciena.com>
To: "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>; "Wataru Imajuku
<imajuku.wataru" <imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "Dieter Beller <D.Beller" <D.Beller@alcatel.de>; "ccamp"
<ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:41 PM
Subject: RE: VCn-xV LSPs terminology


Hi Folks,

It would be worthwhile to check this against the lexicography draft.

Cheers,

Lyndon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Diego Caviglia
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:25 AM
To: Wataru Imajuku <imajuku.wataru
Cc: Dieter Beller <D.Beller; ccamp
Subject: Re: VCn-xV LSPs terminology


Hi Wataru, Dieter,
                    yes I agree with both of you.

Regards

Diego



Wataru Imajuku <imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp> on 27/07/2005 10.00.02

To:    Dieter Beller <D.Beller@alcatel.de>, Diego Caviglia
       <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
cc:    ccamp@ops.ietf.org

Subject:    Re: VCn-xV LSPs terminology

Hi, Diego

   I understand your question is whether we shoud call LSP on the basis
of signaling session or not.

  If so, IMHO is Yes.
  The VC4-7v with single RSVP session is single LSP.
  On the other hand, VC4-3v + VC4-4v with two RSVP session is two LSPs.
  However, both of them are single LSP in the client layer as Dieter
said, .

  That is my understanding.
  But is that right, all ?

Best Regards
Wataru

>Hi Diego,
>
>Diego Caviglia wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>        I'd like to have a terminology clarification about virtual
>>concatenated LSP.
>>
>>When, say a VC4-7v, VCAT circuit is set-up with a single signalling
session
>>RFC3946 (Path, Resv and may be Resv Confirm) is correct to say that
>>the VCAT group is made by a single LSP or that is made by 7 LSPs?
>>
>>IMHO in that case there is a single LSP.
>>
>
>in my understanding, you are describing a multi-layer scenario here
>because the VCAT client layer sits on top of the VC4 server layer (see
>ITU-T Rec. G.806).
>
>If you are in the VCAT client layer, there is IMHO a single LSP that is

>decomposed into 7 HO VC4 LSPs in the VC4 server layer in your example.
>
>Now, if multiple (not necessarily all) VC4 LSPs are routed along the
>same path you could set up a server layer call containing multiple
>VC4 connections using a single RSVP signaling session (as it was done
>in the OIF interop demo this year).
>
>I hope this clarifies the issue.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Dieter
>
>--
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>        V
>+---------------+      Dieter Beller
>| A L C A T E L |      Alcatel Optics Group
>+---------------+      Optical Networks Division
>                       Dept. US/BA3
>
>                       Alcatel SEL AG
>                       Lorenzstrasse 10
>                       D-70435 Stuttgart, Germany
>
>                       Phone:   +49 711 821-43125
>                       Fax:     +49 711 821-47045
>
>                       E-mail:  D.Beller@alcatel.de
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>

---------------------------------
Wataru Imajuku
Senior Research Engineer
@NTT Network Innovation Labs.
TEL +81-46-859-4315
FAX +81-46-859-5541