RE: Liaison to Q6/15 and Meeting Questions...

["Sadler, Jonathan B." <[e-mail]>]

One other item that came up in my read of the liaison text is that Q6 will do a great job helping us with O-O-O, but O-E-O ends up going outside their area of responsibility.  The "E" is actually something that Q12 (from an architecture) and Q11 (from a signal rates/format) have responsibility for.

I can understand that we can talk about O-E-O in terms of a general use case when speaking with Q6, but the issues specifiic to the "E" layer as well as how it relates to the "O" layer is outside Q6's scope.

Jonathan Sadler

________________________________
From: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Malcolm Betts [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:12 PM
To: Razdan, Rajender; Greg Bernstein; ccamp
Subject: RE: Liaison to Q6/15 and Meeting Questions...

One refinement on:
(e) Measurements -- G.697 seems to give a rough framework on applications of measurement, types of measurements, measurement parameters. Is this a good place for anyone investigating the relationship between control plane and optical measurements to start? Other recommendations/ideas
We should ask Q6 how the results of these measurements could be used to refine the values of the impairment parameters used when computing an optical path.  As a part of this discussion we also need to understand when (i.e. what event) triggers the measurements.

Malcolm Betts
Nortel Networks
Phone: [phone] (ESN 393)
email: [e-mail]

________________________________
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Razdan, Rajender
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:32 PM
To: Greg Bernstein; ccamp
Subject: RE: Liaison to Q6/15 and Meeting Questions...


Hi Greg/all,

     I think we do have a consensus on the relative roles of Q6 and CCAMP with regard to the WSON work. It seems to me that the questions Don put up earlier, along with the set of questions you have below, form an excellent starting point for questions we should put forth to Q6 in its upcoming meeting. In addition to everything else I would also add :
FOADM/ROADM/OXC charcterization, i.e. are there any general characterization/parametrization we can use? In particular is there a way to characterize the loss in a photonic network taking into account the filter characteristics of these devices?

Cheers,
Rajender Razdan


[cid:750120917@12032009-223F]
________________________________
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Greg Bernstein
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:53 AM
To: ccamp
Subject: Liaison to Q6/15 and Meeting Questions...

Hi folks, we seem to be re-iterating some issues that I thought we had reached consensus on. However in this conversation some good questions have arisen for the special CCAMP/Q6 meeting.
I thought we had consensus that CCAMP will not define new optical impairments, parameters, etc... but we will use ITU-T existing definitions. If we think we need something we will bring this up with Q6. The response we've seen from Q6 so far has been very positive in working together in this area.

Some potential questions and areas for discussion:
(a) WDM Link characterization  -- G.680 gives lots of examples in appendices but does not actually specify yet. There are a host of other ITU-T documents that cover fiber, amplifiers, dispersion compensation modules, etc... So we'll want Q6's input on a somewhat self contained model.
(b) Receiver characterization -- Is there are general characterization/parameterization we should use?
(c) Transmitter characterization -- Similar question
(d) Signal characterization -- There are a number of different documents in this area, some are specific to SDH, some are very general WDM interface characterizations; Guidance would be welcome so that we don't over specialize.
(e) Measurements -- G.697 seems to give a rough framework on applications of measurement, types of measurements, measurement parameters. Is this a good place for anyone investigating the relationship between control plane and optical measurements to start? Other recommendations/ideas.
(f) Characterization of optical parameters -- (feedback from Q6 desired) parameters that are NE wide, apply to each port, apply between particular ports (port-to-port), frequency dependence of parameters (important for info model and encoding)

Other questions for Q6 from CCAMP?

Best Regards

Greg

--
===================================================
Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking [phone]



============================================================
The information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee
or agent responsible for delivering this message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reproduction,
dissemination or distribution of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and
deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Tellabs
============================================================