| Our good friends at Bellcore used an unfortunate choice of terminology, alas. It is technically true, if you squint, in that the frames that would have been interleaved in a channelized pipe are serialized (one after the other) in the OCxC pipe, and so are concatenated in that sense, but this creates an obviously misleading impression.
I can add a parenthetical insertion that disambiguates it, but given that the spec is in the final throes of last call, ready for RFC and the standards track, I'm loathe to start changing terminology at this late date.
--Dave On Oct 2, 2009, at 1:35 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: Dave, Thank you very much for the detailed description. It really helped me to understand the specification much better. As for “Concatenated Path”, you are right that the Oxford Dictionary defines “concatenation” as “series of linked things or events”. The only problem is that huge deployed bases of Optical interfaces (OC192, OC48, etc) conform to GR253’s definition of concatenation which is to form a fatter pipe (like STS-3c, STS-48c, STS192c). Those optical interfaces (OC192, OC48, OC12) are present on all deployed routers/switches and transport equipment. PW uses “stitch” to refer combining multiple segments. Can BFD use “stitch” too? If you still think that “Concatenated Path” is a better way, then you should add a “Definition Section” in the document to explain it clearly. I am sure that I am not the only one being confused by this.
|
