Re: [CCAMP] Poll on ODUFlex-related encoding

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Wed, 06 February 2013 01:51 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A9921F89E9 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 17:51:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.559
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.706, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fV7OlXGOFxhK for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 17:51:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com (oproxy9.bluehost.com [69.89.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2578621F89D5 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 17:51:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 8825 invoked by uid 0); 6 Feb 2013 01:51:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy9.bluehost.com with SMTP; 6 Feb 2013 01:51:03 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=4QBahRy9KIhrLPg40sqspys8mCXMaBcomIjC9QTD/gk=; b=jbSsKbzZEEN1BfD+PFglJroskMapyBSKPfjoJc6jB5VV7Lt2H5xImmYHC9BeFpD14/i9VpOCTWAl9yESMFLS9Ois5MHxOjmE3qPtoMNSY4GU+P0OqTjJPkzarBCKTL0N;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:55105 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1U2uAB-0006CU-0S; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:51:03 -0700
Message-ID: <5111B704.6080903@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:51:00 -0500
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fred Gruman <fgruman@gmail.com>
References: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF83585B3CE@SZXEML552-MBX.china.huawei.com> <B6585D85A128FD47857D0FD58D8120D3B3CCD0@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com> <0182DEA5604B3A44A2EE61F3EE3ED69E145055F2@BL2PRD0510MB349.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <511189F0.8030709@labn.net> <CA+CjX-pvimLXM_q46VKh8JAsxLfP32NvCVo2Mr4nUqmYZoY6fQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+CjX-pvimLXM_q46VKh8JAsxLfP32NvCVo2Mr4nUqmYZoY6fQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Poll on ODUFlex-related encoding
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 01:51:51 -0000

Thanks fred.  I'm looking at the 2/2012.

Lou

On 2/5/2013 8:28 PM, Fred Gruman wrote:
> Hi Lou,
> 
> I'm not sure if you are looking at the latest version of G.709 (2/2012),
> but ODUflex(GFP) now states +/- 100 ppm in Tables 7-2 and 7-8.
> 
> Although the client tolerance may be less than 100 ppm, under failure
> conditions, the local clock tolerance for ODUflex(GFP) maintenance
> signal generation is 100 ppm.  Thus the ODUflex(GFP) services would
> needs to support the worse case, which is the maintenance signal (and
> thus would always be 100 ppm).
> 
> Fred
>