RE: [EFM] RE: [EFM-OAM] Performance monitoring, installation, trouble shoot ing.
Ron
Like you, I am familiar with one implementation of TDM over layer two. I
guess now I know of another one.
The fine tuning is required in the back haul not the last / first mile. One
has to keep the time critical traffic away from the internet traffic on
pipes with statistical gain. The easiest way is two pipes, one with gain and
one without.
It's an issue of back haul network architecture rather than tuning.
Best regards
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Ron
Jeffries
Sent: 27 January 2002 19:16
To: carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Bob Barrett; stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
Subject: Re: [EFM] RE: [EFM-OAM] Performance monitoring, installation,
trouble shoot ing.
Hi Carlos,
I'm familiar with one implementation where TDM over packet
(IP over Ethernet) works reliably. It is feasible and
"low complexity" to deliver tightly bounded timing
synchronization for TDM streams without the need
for "fine tuning" using standard PHYs.
--ron jeffries
Occam Networks, Inc.
carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Bob Barret said:
> > Servicing 32 customers with time critical data e.g. T1 or POTS (leave
> > aside video for now), requires a scalable TDM like mechanism.
> ^^^^^^^^
> I think you nailed the problem. Making TDM-over-packet emulation work for
a
> few individuals is one thing; making it your main delivery mechanism for
> every voice line is another. Currently available TDM-over-packet solutions
> require fine tuning and care to work well (don't look hard or it will
> break). To make it scalable, it has to be (a) easy to provision and (b)
> bulletproof under load. Current solutions fail to meet both criteria.
>
> Carlos Ribeiro
> CTBC Telecom