Cell Relay Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>List Archive>month:2000-Aug> msg00034



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: CR: Re: ATM vs. Frame Relay

  • From: Thomas Frieling <thomas.frieling@arcormail.de>
  • Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 17:35:58 +0200
  • CC: cell-relay <cell-relay@cell.onecall.net>
  • Organization: keine


Afroz Lateef schrieb:
> 
> Thomas and Charles,
> 
> PNNI does have re-routing facilities (of course, for  SPVCs and SPVPs only).
> Crankback and re-routing in the PNNI spec, I guess talk about this.
> VNN is not Lucent's proprietary, it is part of the specs. (VNNI and VUNI).
> 
> Afroz Lateef
> Fujitsu Network Communications
> 

Alfroz,

where is this ability quoted? I have searched the ATM-Forum spec
(PNNI 1.0) and the SPVC Addendum and there are no facilities
defined to dynamically re-route broken connections. Crankback is
a mechanism that is used when the route calculated by the source
switch is broken at setup time! Crankback makes sure that a
viable route can be found in that case. Once the connection is
established PNNI has finished its job.
Connection re-routing is under way in the ATM-Forum study group
Control Signalling and currently in the status "Work in Progress
-- to be done".
And VNN is definitely proprietary to Ascend (now part of Lucent).
This can for example be seen in
http://www.ascend.com.au/2373.html where you find this: "...
Virtual Network Navigator (VNN), Ascend's enhanced version of the
industry-standard OSPF algorithm, ...".

Regards

Thomas Frieling