1 / 4

LCAS scenario

LCAS scenario. Ethernet client. Domain 2 SDH network. UNI. UNI. Domain 1 SDH network. Domain 3 SDH network. Ethernet clients. Ethernet client. LCAS scenario.

cortez
Download Presentation

LCAS scenario

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LCAS scenario Ethernetclient Domain 2 SDH network UNI UNI Domain 1 SDH network Domain 3 SDH network Ethernetclients Ethernetclient

  2. LCAS scenario • (Multi-domain) SDH transport network with GFP/VCAT/LCAS capabilities (at least in the edge-nodes) supporting ethernet clients both “smart” (i.e. routers) and “dumb” (i.e. switches) devices • Dynamic allocation of VCs to efficiently transport ethernet traffic (up to 2 VC-3 for fast-ethernet and up to 21 VC-3 for gigabit-ethernet). Different granularities may be used as well. • For “smart” client devices: • UNI with “call bandwidth modification” capabilities • For “dumb” client devices: • An automatic trigger mechanism can be implemented on the edge nodes, monitoring the amount of traffic received from the client device

  3. Network services • Use of legacy SDH metro/regional networks for transport of ethernet signals from the access segment to the metro aggregation POP • Interconnecting of geographically distributed ethernet LANs • Interconnecting metro PoPs via a Core (Long Haul) Network

  4. Issues • The most interesting feature of LCAS is the capability of dividing the VCG on 2 or more diversely routed paths, thereby allowing higher degree of resilience. This poses several issues: • Call/Connection separation (separate call and connection setup, identification of LSPs belonging to the same Call, traffic descriptors mapping) • Managing resilience requirements (e.g. diversity) • LCAS operation indication • Upstream LCAS procedure triggering • Managing delay skew of different connections (is this really an issue?)

More Related