[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Final draft of response to the OIF



Ben,
Adrian's final draft of the response is most inclusive. From what you said earlier, it seems that you've already coded it in one way (whichever) but are accepting both sets of values for NCC & RCC (both 1 or 0).
Is there an engineering problem with the text of the response besides that you would be able to remove those couple of lines of code? if so, we should solve it.
Richard.



Mack-Crane, T. Benjamin wrote:

Hi Huub,

See in-line below.

Regards,
Ben



-----Original Message-----
From: Huub van Helvoort [mailto:hhelvoort@chello.nl] Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 10:56 AM
To: Mack-Crane, T. Benjamin
Cc: Adrian Farrel; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Final draft of response to the OIF


Hello Ben,

You wrote:



I proposed a simple (and I think technically sound) solution to
item #1 and saw no objections, however the answer has not changed.

I do not understand the reason for different encodings for
VC-4 and STS-3c SPE. I think they should be the same, unless
there is a technical need to distinguish them.


If there is agreement that they should be the same, we should
also look at higher order contiguous concatenated signals:
i.e. STS-12c == VC-4-4c, STS-48c == VC-4-16c, STS-192c == VC-4-64c
STS-768c == VC-4-256c



These signals are already encoded the same way (for instance see examples 3 and 9 in RFC 3946).



I also do not understand the RCC=1 NCC=1 encoding, since the rule
contained in the current RFC actually makes more sense.


However indicating the number of signals concatenated in NCC
makes your first objective impossible: STS-3Xc == VC-4-Xc
so there will always be a difference of a factor 3 between
STS and VC-4 encoding



All the encodings of contiguous concatenated signals use VC-4 (STS-3c SPE) as the base, so the NCC values are the same. This was done to align SONET and SDH encodings.



If there is
only
one signal element, there is no contiguous concatenation,


by definition.

In fact a single signal is always contiguous concatenated  ;-)



So I fail to see the usefulness of these encodings.


NCC = 1 would normally not occur, so it could be used for
this specific case of SONET signals transported in an
SDH world, or SDH signals transported in SONET land.
And if these signals would not cross borders the value
NCC > 1 can be used.



The SDH and SONET encodings have been aligned in all cases except this one (VC-4, STS-3c SPE). So these should also be aligned.



Regards,
Ben


Cheers, Huub.

--
================================================================
             http://members.chello.nl/hhelvoort/
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...



============================================================
The information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee
or agent responsible for delivering this message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reproduction,
dissemination or distribution of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and
deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Tellabs
============================================================



begin:vcard
fn:Richard Rabbat
n:Rabbat;Richard
org:Fujitsu Labs of America;IP Networking Research
adr:MS 345;;1240 East Arques Ave;Sunnyvale;CA;94085;USA
email;internet:richard@us.fujitsu.com
title:Senior Project Manager
tel;work:1-408-530-4537
tel;fax:1-408-530-4515
tel;cell:1-650-714-7618
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard