RE: comments on draft-shiba-ccamp-gmpls-lambda-labels-00.txt

["Drake, John E" <John.E.Drake2@boeing.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf
> Of Payam Torab
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 12:22 PM
> To: Drake, John E; 'Shiba, Sidney'; dpapadimitriou@psg.com
> Cc: 'Adrian Farrel'; richard.rabbat@us.fujitsu.com; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: comments on draft-shiba-ccamp-gmpls-lambda-labels-00.txt
> 
> John- So, with bundling out of the picture, we have closure:
> 
> - If there is no real difference between multiple parallel channels of
the
> same wavelength, we may want to combine these channels into a single
TE
> link for scalability and crankback benefits. In this case, there will
be a
> clash in the lambda label space if the label is going to have a purely
> spectral meaning.
> 
> - If these parallel channels have different properties to the extent
that
> one wants to bind an LSP to a particular channel, then combining (and
> obviously bundling) is not an option anyway.
[JD] 

Correct.  My other point was that wavelength alone probably isn't
sufficient to characterize a WDM line system for purposes of
interoperability.

> 
> Thanks,
> Payam
>