RE: [802.3ae] Wan Interface Sublayer
Roy,
One difference might be that OC-192c POS interfaces are fully compliant to
SONET/SDH jitter specifications (in terms of generation, transfer and
tolerance). The two parameters that are important with regard to interop
with long haul DWDM systems are obviously jitter generation and jitter
tolerance. If I understand correctly the 10GbE WAN PHY is not currently
aligned with SONET/SDH jitter specs. Any thoughts about the impact of this
on the interop with long haul systems ? I guess it was always my
understanding that one of the functions of this mysterious ELTE was to
convert from WAN PHY jitter specs to SONET/SDH jitter specs?
Gary Nicholl .............
At 10:29 AM 8/27/2001 -0500, Roy Bynum wrote:
>Mike,
>
>We are currently deploying OC192c POS over long haul systems using only
>amplifiers and SREs. The network management of the POS systems at each
>end of the SONET span is separate from the SONET span. The POS systems
>are "free-running" relative to SONET synchronization. Fault protection is
>being handled by the SREs. I do not see any difference in deploying 10GbE
>WAN PHY in the same way.
>
>Thank you,
>Roy Bynum
>
>At 04:56 PM 8/24/01 -0500, Ayers, Mike wrote:
>
>
>> > From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 01:09 PM
>>
>> > Being a SONET transmission service provider with OC192 SREs
>> > already in the
>> > transmission network. With the WAN PHY at +/-20PPM, your
>> > possibility #1 is
>> > correct. The SONET SREs (read SONET class B regenerators)
>> > can handle the
>> > WAN PHY and provide section level performance monitoring and
>> > protection.
>>
>>
>>
>> > From: James Colin [mailto:james_colin_i@xxxxxxxxx]
>> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:14 AM
>>
>> > Option (4) is the correct answer. SONET and WIS must
>> > stay on their own network. A network device called
>> > "ELTE" is doing the bridging between the WIS net and
>> > the SONET.
>>
>>
>> Hmmm - I think a little more discussion on this is in order, and by
>>minds greater than mine. My interest is this: if it is possible to route
>>WIS directly over a SONET network, then the management model for WIS becomes
>>much more involved, since it must support management by either the SONET
>>model or the traditional ethernet model (two very different models).
>>However, if an ELTE is required betrween the two, it effectively separates
>>the networks such that there is no overlap nor need for two management
>>models; ethernet being used on one side of the ELTE and SONET on the other.
>>It does not matter, from my perspective, whether an ELTE gets used - what
>>matters is whether the ELTE is required. Is it possible that the SRE is
>>acting as an ELTE in Roy's scenario?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>/|/|ike