The IP over ATM Mailing List Archive by date[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Mpt-Pt AAL5 delimiting
*** Resending note of 03/28/96 18:12
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From:
Subject:
Subject: Mpt-Pt AAL5 delimiting
Bert, how does this differ from making those points VP end-points,
have end-to-end connections cross one or more VP links,
as needed and terminate at the VP end points as needed and use
VCI for demultiplexing. This would make it all legal :). In either
case, there is the problem of allocating unique VCs/source.
Raif
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If AAL5 cells can't be interleaved because there's no way of unscrambling
them after the fact,
If there would tend to be few senders and many more receivers in a mpt-pt
connection, and
If one wants to establish one VC for the mpt-pt connection, then
I wonder about a bastardized use of VPIs? How about each sender uses the
same VCI but different VPIs? This would allow interleaving of AAL5 cells
at all merge points while still keeping them identifiable. And scaling
might not be a real problem.
This strange use of VPIs could become a problem when the intended use of
VPs is implemented, but then again ATM switches could manage both uses of
VPs separately, no? Couldn't switches dynamically keep track of which
VPIs were to be terminated at own switch for mpt-pt connections, and
which VPIs were just for cells in transit?
Somehow, the meticulous buffering of n packets' worth of cells along the
way is sure to incite the ire of the ATM god.
Bert
manfredi@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com
|
|