RE: Next Steps toward an RPR Draft Standard

[Raj Sharma <raj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: Next Steps toward an RPR Draft Standard

Howard,
The issue is clock synchronization of TDM equipment
using RPR tunnels. It is inconceivable of clock synchronization
with a required minimum jitter over Ethernet physical layer and can may
only be provided if SONET is not used. This makes RPR dependendent
on a particular physical layer for some of the services defined.
raj

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Frazier [mailto:hfrazier@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2000 10:49 AM
To: stds-802-rprsg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Next Steps toward an RPR Draft Standard

Raj,

I thought that the work of the RPRSG was to create a layer 2 protocol
that was optimized for data transfer.  I don't recall seeing the
words "multi service" in the PAR that we unanimously agreed upon.

That said, I do not see why Voice, Video and Data can't be carried on
an RPR which uses an 802.3 gigabit or 10 gigabit physical layer.
What's magic about the SONET physical layer in this regard?

Howard Frazier
Cisco Systems, Inc.