Subject: RE: Trying to be clearer about Generalized MPLS and MPLambdaS

From: "Peter Ashwood-Smith" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:18:27 -0500

I think the two terms are being used (incorrectly) interchangeably.
Generalized MPLS allows any kind of label of which a wavelength (lambda) is
one kind. 

A lot of this started with the thought that if we can switch a wavelength on
an input port to a new wavelength on an output port that this would be MPLS.
Where the 'L' is a wavelength. This thinking led very quickly to the thought
that anything we can 'switch' can effectively be controlled by MPLS and so
we included timeslots and entire fibers into the definition and called it
'generalized'.

Part of the problem is that MP<LAMBDA>S, sounds far more sexy than
Generalized MPLS signaling .. perhaps we need a new sexier name?

Cheers,

Peter Ashwood-Smith

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Dawkins, Spencer [SMTP:[email-masked]]
	Sent:	Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:52 AM
	To:	'IETF MPLS mailing list'
	Subject:	Trying to be clearer about Generalized MPLS and
MPLambdaS

	I'm not entirely clear on the relationship between Generalized MPLS
and MPLambdaS. If I thought that

	- Generalized MPLS extends MPLS to include LSR interfaces that
switch packets, timeslots, wavelengths, or physical fiber links, while

	- MPLambdaS describes an OXC control plane design that allows OXCs
to participate in networks using Generalized MPLS,

	how wrong would I be?

	Humbly,

	Spencer

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:53:26 -0400

In message <[email-masked]>, "
> Generalized MPLS signaling .. perhaps we need a new sexier name?

Please stick to what we have.  We'll get used to it.

Curtis