| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Bob et. al., I think we should keep with the conventions of
transmit and receive at the ring interface. Receive is for traffic entering a station from the
ring. Transmit for traffic a
station is sending on the ring. I am also in favor of keeping with “transit
traffic” and “transit station” in that they seem to be more descriptive terms for the traffic which is
passing through a station as opposed to stations which are the traffic source or
destination. We do need terms which distinguish between traffic
which is received / transmitted on the ring vs. received/transmitted between the MAC and
the “upper layer”. I like your
suggestion of MAC ingress / MAC egress. “MAC egress” is traffic from the upper
layer to the MAC for transmission onto the ring. “MAC ingress” is traffic from the MAC
to the upper layer which was received from the ring. I originally considered ingress/egress
in the opposite sense, but think this sense is better in keeping with the
ring as the reference point. thanks, bob -----Original
Message----- Mike and
group, Interesting problem. Some alternatives are: We could use add/drop, but then it seems
that we should use 'continue' instead of 'transit' to be consistent with the
SONET use of add/drop/continue. We could use inbound/outbound (and
use receive/transmit on the ring) but inbound/outbound has a railway connotation
that makes it much more appropriate for describing ring traffic. We could also use ingress/egress in our
MAC description, and acknowledge that other layers may choose to redefine these
terms relative to themselves. In other words, ingress within our MAC
specification would be understood
to mean ring or MAC ingress. I agree on wrapping (opinion with Fujitsu
hat on). It is confusing to call it wrapping when you change ringlets but
continue in the same direction. Other opinions? After showing various other curiosities,
P.T. Barnum bought the American Museum in New York City in 1841. The museum’s
attractions included ventriloquists, jugglers, educated dogs, dioramas,
Albinos, giants, dwarfs, and many other things of interest.Under Barnum’s
management, the museum grew in size and popularity.The lecture room was
enlarged and soon held shows everyday. The museum was particularly crowded on
holidays when people would bring their dinner and spend the day. Barnum did not
like this because it prevented a steady turnover in museum patrons. To solve
this problem, Barnum hung a sign that read “To the Egress” above the exit door. The curious
visitors did not want to miss anything, but when they went through the door,
they found the strange animal they had expected did not exist, and they had
been tricked out the door. The only way back in was to pay again. (but were
they headed to or from the ring?). |