Cell Relay Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>List Archive>month:2000-Jul> msg00029



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

Re: SRTS

  • From: <agallo@foghorn.nit.gwu.edu>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:19:26 GMT
  • Organization: The George Washington University
  • User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980818 ("Laura") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u))
  • X-Complaints-To: news@nit.gwu.edu


Thanks for all the replies- I've learned a great deal about SRTS lately!
First, I do mean ATM over DS-3.  It is one of multiple PNNI links on our network. 
We run both AAL5 (for LANE) and AAL1 (for PBX traffic- we've got a Lucent G3 running
in PNC or native ATM mode- no circuit emulation). Also, I did turn on DS-3 scrambling
with no improvement.  I've tried every combination of mode (hcs vs. plcp) and framing 
(cchannel vs. cbit) on the ASX-200BX- to improvement.

The radio link by itself tests great with a TBERD (better than 1x10-9 BER) and
the ATM switches test fine in loopback.  The two systems together, however, don't
work well.  I'm getting a high number of DS-3 framing errors, P-bit errors, out of 
frame, all eventually leading to ATM header checksum erros; from time to time
this is enough to bring down ATM signalling between the switches cuasing the
SVCs to reroute to a backup T1.

At this point, the radio vendor is saying that SRTS would be needed.  As I'm sure
some of you could tell by my question- I didn't know to much about it!  
>From the responses, this new "requirement" for SRTS does not sound appropriate.

Once again, thanks for al the replies.


Andrew Gallo 							202-994-9026
IS Engineer
The George Washington University
*******************************************
PGP Key available at http://gwu.edu/~agallo
*******************************************


  • Follow-Ups:
  • References:
    • SRTS
      • From: <agallo@foghorn.nit.gwu.edu>
    • Re: SRTS
      • From: Koen Peeters <koen.peeters@ciminko.be>