> > > Standard contiguous concatenated STS-Nc SPE is actually STS-3c-Xc SPE
> > > with N=3X and X=4,16,64,... which explains the coding with a STS-3c SPE
> > > elementary signal and NCC=X. So we code the STS-Nc SPE and VC-4-Xc
> > > identical (examples 3 and 9) but not their base signal ?!?...
> > i refer you to section 7.3.1 of ANSI T1.105 - 2001 (aka SONET base spec)
> > you will that your interpretation is not the one specified in this
> > recommendation
> > " Super rates services are mapped into and transported as STS-Nc SPE
> > [N=3X there X = 1, 4, 16, 64 or 256]"
> Somehow you left out the last part between the square brackets:
> "or SDH VC-4 or VC-4-Xc, where X=N/3]"
> This clearly means that an STS-3c == VC-4 == super rate of STS-1.
indeed but we are not discussing this issue or put this "equivalence" under questioning (in fact this is reproduced in the signal type 6 definition) the RFC took as logic (control plane) to set the RCC value when the notation of the signal included a "c" we could have created yet another exception but we did not - for several reasons -
> > this is exactly what we used in RFC 3946
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...