The MPLS WG Archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

[IP-Optical] RE: GMPLS - Lable

From: "Mannie, Eric" <Eric.Mannie@gts.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 19:46:22 +0100
Cc: "'mpls@UU.NET '" <mpls@UU.NET>, "'ip-optical@lists.bell-labs.com '" <ip-optical@lists.bell-labs.com>

Hi Maarten,


>The VC-11 is not converted into a VC-12 (header text of 10.1.6/G.707 is
>not accurately reflecting the process). A VC-11 is transported via a
>TU-12 time slot, but it stays a VC-11 signal. The text in G.707
>(10/2000) indicates this:

Yes, I know this why I used "converted" between quotes.
The important point is that the VC-11 looks like a VC-12 in a TU-12 and that
intermediate switches don't care about the VC-11.

> Note that in SDH "lower order timeslots" are called :"TU",
> whereas the "signal" being transported via such TU timeslot
> is called a "VC". Idem for higher order timeslots (AU) and
> signals (VC).
 
It is even "worst" than that since a time slot is indeed a part of a TU (see
TS numbering).
In addition, the term "signal" is used to designate almost everything in
SDH, including an STM-N "signal", a VC-X signal, to designate what can be
transported into a VC-x (e.g. G.702 signal), i.e. client signals (IP, PDH,
ATM,, etc).

The vocabulary is loosely used/defined :-)

Kind regards,

Eric