[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: VCn-xV LSPs terminology
- To: "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>, "Wataru Imajuku <imajuku.wataru" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Alan Bailey \(Alan Bailey\)" <IMCEAEX-_O=NORTEL_OU=EuropeM01_cn=Recipients_cn=Exchange_cn=3220803@AmericasM01.nt.com>
- Subject: RE: VCn-xV LSPs terminology
- From: "Trevor Wilson" <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:50:04 +0100
- Cc: "Dieter Beller <D.Beller" <D.Beller@alcatel.de>, "ccamp" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Ludovico Prattico" <email@example.com>, "Pete Anslow" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Malcolm Betts" <email@example.com>, "Graham Copley" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Astrid Lozano" <email@example.com>, "David Martin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Michael Mayer" <email@example.com>
Firtsly, lets get the nomenclature correct. A virtually concatenated
signal is denoted as VC-n-Xv (please note the use of hyphens and
upper/lower case letters). Also I will use VCG = Virtually Concatenated
Group in my reply below.
Wataru: You wrote
"The VC4-7v with single RSVP session is single LSP.
On the other hand, VC4-3v + VC4-4v with two RSVP session is two LSPs "
I assume that when you say 'VC-4-3v + VC-4-4v' you mean that the VCG has
a total of seven members transported over two routes, one with three
members and one with four members. This is and always will be a VC-4-7v.
It is not a summation of two VCGs. You cannot think of each route as a
separate VCG. The VCAT function at the terminations of the connection
will regard all individual VC-4s as members of the VC-4-7v, regardless
of which route they were transported on.
I hope this helps.
Tel: +44 2890 363701
ESN 751 3701
>This is the Way. This is Nortel.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On
Behalf Of Diego Caviglia
Sent: 27 July 2005 09:25
To: Wataru Imajuku <imajuku.wataru
Cc: Dieter Beller <D.Beller; ccamp
Subject: Re: VCn-xV LSPs terminology
Hi Wataru, Dieter,
yes I agree with both of you.
Wataru Imajuku <firstname.lastname@example.org> on 27/07/2005 10.00.02
To: Dieter Beller <D.Beller@alcatel.de>, Diego Caviglia
Subject: Re: VCn-xV LSPs terminology
I understand your question is whether we shoud call LSP on the basis
of signaling session or not.
If so, IMHO is Yes.
The VC4-7v with single RSVP session is single LSP.
On the other hand, VC4-3v + VC4-4v with two RSVP session is two LSPs.
However, both of them are single LSP in the client layer as Dieter
That is my understanding.
But is that right, all ?
>Diego Caviglia wrote:
>> I'd like to have a terminology clarification about virtual
>>When, say a VC4-7v, VCAT circuit is set-up with a single signalling
>>RFC3946 (Path, Resv and may be Resv Confirm) is correct to say that
>>the VCAT group is made by a single LSP or that is made by 7 LSPs?
>>IMHO in that case there is a single LSP.
>in my understanding, you are describing a multi-layer scenario here
>because the VCAT client layer sits on top of the VC4 server layer (see
>ITU-T Rec. G.806).
>If you are in the VCAT client layer, there is IMHO a single LSP that is
>decomposed into 7 HO VC4 LSPs in the VC4 server layer in your example.
>Now, if multiple (not necessarily all) VC4 LSPs are routed along the
>same path you could set up a server layer call containing multiple VC4
>connections using a single RSVP signaling session (as it was done in
>the OIF interop demo this year).
>I hope this clarifies the issue.
>+---------------+ Dieter Beller
>| A L C A T E L | Alcatel Optics Group
>+---------------+ Optical Networks Division
> Dept. US/BA3
> Alcatel SEL AG
> Lorenzstrasse 10
> D-70435 Stuttgart, Germany
> Phone: +49 711 821-43125
> Fax: +49 711 821-47045
> E-mail: D.Beller@alcatel.de
Senior Research Engineer
@NTT Network Innovation Labs.