[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Comments on draft-kim-ccamp-cc-protection-04
I'd like to make some comments on the ID in the subjec.
In general, there may be several advantages of out-of-fiber over in-
fiber such as the followings:
[dc] I don't agree with this sentence. I don't think that there are
advantes in the usage of out-of-fiber.
- When using the overhead bytes of SONET/SDH as a control channel,
in-fiber may require more resources such as HDLC controllers whereas
out-of-fiber could reduce the number of these resources;
[dc] This is a strange sentece. SONET/SDH DCC have not been developed for
GMPLS, are there since several years
and seems very strange to me to think about a SONET/SDH box that do not
support DCC processing.
- In case of only in-fiber, it looks that there is no room or no need
for protecting control channels. However, out-of-fiber may apply the
various and effective software based protection schemes;
[dc] Why there is no room for protecting control channels? Do you have any
figures about this? The line level DCC is 576 kbps while
the section DCC is 192 kbps. Do you thing the control traffic will be more
- In-fiber is difficult to separate control plane from transport
plane, whereas out-of-fiber is easy to separate control plane;
[dc] IMHO this is not true and moreover you need to explain why is more
difficult. Today DCC are widely used to transport management traffic and
there are no difficulties in order to separate management from data
- Because in-fiber provides the connection control function only
within a single fiber, in-fiber could not provide the connection
control function beyond a single fiber, whereas out-of-fiber has no
restriction about the number of fibers for the connection control
[dc] Could you explain me a little bit more this? I don't see anything
that prevent me to set-up more that one CC on a fiber.
When the out-of-fiber configuration is used, control channels may be shared
to handle several fibers
[dc] IMHO the cc are associated to the TE and not to the fibre, so a single
CC can serve several TE link and thus several fibre; this is not related on
how it is implemented.
Consequently, to provide the resilience capability of control channels, it
is reasonable to use out-of-fiber rather than in-fiber for GMPLS.
[dc] I don't see how the previous sentences can lead to this statement.
What is reasonable is that the control channels must be resilient but this
don't implies the fact they should be out-of-fiber.