I would suppose we have an overhead attached to this payload. What is it?
- It seems we don't have an overhead at this step (for ODUflex).
- Is ODTU2.3 payload exactly similar to this ODUflex(GFP)?
I am really sorry to waste your time, the previous post cannot be
modified.
After writing it, suddendly I found some elements.
I would suppose we have an overhead attached to this payload. What
is it?
There is no exemption in the format. The OPUflex and ODUflex formats
are same as OPUk and ODUk. Only periodicity differ.
For OPUflex, we can see section 17.4 : mapping of GFP frames into
OPUk (k=0,1,2,3,4,flex). The OPUk unities have a general format.
- It seems we don't have an overhead at this step (for ODUflex).
It was my confusion by interpreting the figure 7-5. In fact, the
writing of "ODU OH" means "ODUflex OH". Probably there was no
sufficient place to note this. Of course, after understanding, we see
the relation just below "ODU (ODUflex)"!
I have problems of view.
- Is ODTU2.3 payload exactly similar to this ODUflex(GFP)?
I see that the nominal bandwidth of ODTU2.ts for example is the TS
bandwidth in OPU2. The numeric value in table 7-7 is rounded.
On the other hand the value of nominal bandwidth of ODU2.ts is exact,
not rounded, a little bit lower than ODTU2.ts.
It is mentioned that this exact value is to easy the clock
generation. Have you pleased a word for that.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 296 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 50:16:03 |
Calls: | 6,649 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,200 |
Messages: | 5,330,205 |