Re: draft-bernstein-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-01 comments - delay

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

Huub, I don't see them in the spam bucket, but given the rate of arrival
of new spam it is possible they went out the over flow before I got there
:-(

Please post again.

In general, attachments can be a bit risky as they are more likely to be
excised. In line text is better.

Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Huub van Helvoort" <hhelvoort@chello.nl>
To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: draft-bernstein-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-01 comments - delay


> FYI,
>
> before sending the email quoted below I already did send
> two other emails, one with comments and the other with the
> forgotten attachment. Without the attachment the comment
> below is worthless.
>
> Sofar these messages have not appeared on the ccamp list
> (but they did on the SG15/Q9 and SG15/Q11 lists).
>
> So maybe they are in the ccamp spam-trap.
> If they do not re-appear soon I will repost them.
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> regards, Huub.
> ===============================================================
> Huub van Helvoort wrote:
>
> > Hello Greg et al,
> >
> > One additional comment:
> >
> > Depending on the level of detail to be provided in this document.
> >
> > In section 2.4 VCAT configuration with LCAS (MI_LCASEnable=true)
> >
> > The value of Xm is not only technology dependent, it can also be
> > implementation dependent. E.g. in a routerinterface with STM-64
> > line rate for a VC-4-Xv based VCG Xm = 64 and not 256.
> > Xm cannot be provisioned, it can be retreived from the VCG
> > (as well as Xa).
> >
> > Have a nice weekend, Huub.
> >
>
> -- 
> ================================================================
>               http://members.chello.nl/hhelvoort/
> ================================================================
> Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...
>
>
>