RE: [PWOT] RE: draft-danenberg-sonet-ces-mpls-mib-00.txt

Manohar,

Your viewpoint is appreciated.  I've already included this topic area 
(support for DS-N) in the open issues section of 
draft-malis-sonet-ces-mpls-03.txt.  I'm looking forward to further 
discussion on the list and at Minneapolis to see if we can reach consensus 
on the requirements and candidate implementation solutions.

Thanks,
Andy

-------

At 3/2/2001 12:45 PM -0800, Manohar Naidu Ellanti wrote:

>Tom,
>
>It would be nice to have the  problem definition before looking at the
>details of CEM. To me SONET STS-N(Nc) signal transport over  MPLS networks
>is the problem that the CEM draft seem to address and I have reservations
>about that.
>
>I think  SONET/SDH CEM solution assumes that the client equipment connected
>to an MPLS network is interfacing on a OC-N interface. What if the client
>equipment is interfacing to MPLS network on T3/T1 interface. How is such
>client signal (DS1/DS3) transported if the CEM is very explicit about
>SONET/SDH ? Isn't it a goal to keep  TDM to the network boundaries only and
>not have TDM aggregation creep into the core of MPLS network? I think it is
>more of a network architectural issue and I think carriers can help us with
>the problem definition.
>
>
>-Manohar

_______________________________________________
pwot mailing list
pwot@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwot