RE: [BULK] VCAT/LCAS draft update...

["Jishnu A" <jishnu@india.tejasnetworks.com>]

Dear Hubb,
As there is a note on Fixed co-routed about this being needed to minimize
the differential delay, same could be added for Dynamic, co-routed also.

"Dynamic, co-routed: A dynamic VCG (bandwidth can be increased or decreased
via the addition or removal of member signals), transported over a co-routed
set of members.  The intent here is dynamic resizing and resilience of
bandwidth at the same time minimizing the differential delay."

Is it left out as it is obvious? 

Also the document does not mention why one needs to minimize the
differential delay. Again, is it assumed that this is well known and left
out? 

Regards,
Jishnu A

-----Original Message-----
From: Huub van Helvoort [mailto:hhelvoort@chello.nl] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:02 PM
To: Jishnu A
Cc: 'Greg Bernstein'; 'ccamp'
Subject: Re: [BULK] VCAT/LCAS draft update...
Importance: Low

Hi Jishnu,

you replied:

> Adding to Hubb's reply below
> The MFI field in LCAS allows support upto a maximum of 256ms differential
> delay compensation for HO VC. But the exact value is completely depending
on
> the vendor implementation and can be anything between 125us to 256ms.

This is information that is well known.

Reading your initial email again I am confused by the
additional reponse.

Can you please inform us of what the issue is that you
would like to resolve.
And make a distinction between the two modes:
==  VCAT without LCAS
==  VCAT with  LCAS.

Thank you, Huub.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Huub van Helvoort [mailto:hhelvoort@chello.nl] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:34 PM
> To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS
> Cc: Jishnu A; Greg Bernstein; ccamp
> Subject: Re: [BULK] VCAT/LCAS draft update...
> Importance: Low
> 
> Hi Deborah,
> 
> You replied:
> 
>> Shouldn't be a problem if the data plane is based on ITU - so it would
>> need to support (at minimum) ITU's G.707 minimum differential delay
>> requirements for VCAT.
> 
> Minimum delay in G.707 is 125 usec (micro-seconds)...
> 
> Maximum differential delay depends on implementation.
> Differential is the difference between the largest
> propagation delay of one of the members and the
> smallest propagation delay of one of the members.
> The sink VCAT/LCAS function is capable of detecting
> and reporting whether one or more members does not fit
> the differential delay capability.
> 
> Cheers, Huub.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jishnu A
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:03 AM
>> To: 'Greg Bernstein'
>> Cc: 'ccamp'
>> Subject: RE: [BULK] VCAT/LCAS draft update...
>>
>> Dear Greg,
>> One additional problem with VCAT/LCAS is the amount of differential
>> delay
>> supported at the destination node. Can it be mentioned as a note that
>> co-routing or diversely routing is also based on the availability of
>> enough
>> sufficient differential delay buffer size at the destination node? 
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jishnu A
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
>> Behalf
>> Of Greg Bernstein
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:07 AM
>> To: ccamp
>> Subject: [BULK] VCAT/LCAS draft update...
>> Importance: Low
>>
>> Hi folks, I edited the VCAT/LCAS draft to use the CALL_ATTRIBUTES object
>>
>> from the MLN extensions draft.
>> We define a new VCAT TLV for use in the aforementioned object.  All 
>> procedures and encodings otherwise are the same as the previous draft. 
>> Note that the draft will now be contingent on the MLN extensions draft 
>> moving forward.
>>
>> A URL for the Internet-Draft is:
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-06.
>> txt
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Greg
>>
> 

-- 
================================================================
                   http://www.van-helvoort.eu/
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3658 (20081202) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3658 (20081202) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com