RE: Re-Updated Draft Liaison to Q6/15

["Varma, Eve L \(Eve\)" <evarma@alcatel-lucent.com>]

Another difference is the first speaks of service provider choice, and
the second refers to implementer choice. 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:17 PM
To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Re-Updated Draft Liaison to Q6/15

Does anyone else have an opinion on the difference between these two
paragraphs...

> However, if a service provider chooses to measure optical link 
> impairments on an out of service basis and this can be achieved within

> ITU-T standards , then this should not be prohibited by the CCAMP 
> protocol mechanisms, and the communication of the information 
> collected should be accommodated within GMPLS"

> However, if an implementer chooses to measure impairments on their 
> device, and this can be achieved within the mechanisms and definitions

> defined by the ITU-T, then this should not be prohibited by the CCAMP 
> protocol mechanisms, and the communication of the information 
> collected should be accommodated within GMPLS.

There are several differences:

- state impairments are "optical impairments"
- limit impairments to "link impairments"
- restrict discussion to "out of service measurements"
- refer to "ITU-T standards" rather than "mechanisms
  and definitions defined by the ITU-T"

Thanks,
Adrian