The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Apr> msg00123



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

Transparency flags for SONET/SDH

  • From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
  • Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 12:46:51 +0200
  • CC: mpls@UU.NET
  • User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02
  • X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at04/16/2003 12:48:34,Serialize by Router on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at04/16/2003 12:48:35,Serialize complete at 04/16/2003 12:48:35

hi,

 > I want to know -
 > 	whether Section 3.2 of RFC3471 is applicable for any
 > or fully transparent signal ?

for fully transparent signal only (i.e. in the second
statement it clearly refers to "full" transparency)

 >   	If that so, section 3.2 of RFC3471 doesn't specific
 > any format for SONET/SDH label.
 > 	So, Is it fine to use generalized label in this case?

in this case, the G_LABEL of section 3.2 applies.

thanks,
- dimitri.

bhuvan laddha wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I would appreciate clarification for the following
> points in the
> 'draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-08.txt':
> 
> 1. Last paragraph of section 2. 'SONET and SDH Traffic
> Parameters' states as 
> 
> " The traffic parameters and label encoding defined in
> [RFC3471]
>    Section 3.2 MUST be used for fully transparent
> STS-1/STM-0/STS-
>    3*N/STM-N (N=1, 4, 16, 64, 256) signal requests. A
> fully
>    transparent signal is one for which all overhead is
> left
>    unmodified by intermediate nodes, i.e., when all
> defined
>    Transparency (T) bits would be set if the traffic
> parameters
>    defined in section 2.1 were used."
> 
> Whereas one of the paragraph of section 3. 'SONET and
> SDH Labels' states as 
> 
> " The label format defined in this section, referred
> to as SUKLM,
>    MUST be used for any SONET/SDH signal requests that
> are not
>    transparent i.e. when all Transparency (T) bits
> defined in section
>    2.1 are set to zero. Any transparent
> STS-1/STM-0/STS-3*N/STM-N
>    (N=1, 4, 16, 64, 256) signal request MUST use a
> label format as
>    defined in [RFC3471]. "
> 
> 
> I want to know - 
> 	whether Section 3.2 of RFC3471 is applicable for any
> or fully transparent signal ?
>   	If that so, section 3.2 of RFC3471 doesn't specific
> any format for SONET/SDH label.
> 	So, Is it fine to use generalized label in this case?
> 
> 
> Please correct me if I missed something...
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com


-- 
Papadimitriou Dimitri
E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
Private: http://www.rc.bel.alcatel.be/~papadimd/index.html
E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone  : +32 3 240-8491