home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.cell-relay
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!iscnvx!news
- From: bantha.decnet.lockheed.com!young
- Subject: Re: Bare Bones Adaptation
- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.145126.29419@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com>
- Reply-To: young@bantha.decnet.lockheed.com
- Sender: news@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (News)
- Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
- References: <1992Sep1.154417.10424@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> <1992Sep2.043325.2784@adaptive.com> <1992Sep2.222815.9025@infodev.cam.ac.uk>,<9224710.1007@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 14:51:26 GMT
- Lines: 33
-
- In article <9224710.1007@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>, gja@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Grenville Armitage) writes:
- >In article <1992Sep2.222815.9025@infodev.cam.ac.uk> dm@cl.cam.ac.uk (Derek McAuley) writes:
- > [..]
- >>Seriously, is AAL5 *the* bare bones adapt(at)ion layer, or did it
- >>simply force the CCITT to realise they hadn't solved all the worlds
- >>future networking problems with AAL1/2/3/4, .... ? (Rhetorical.)
- >
- >It's imprecise to refer to _any_ of the AALs as *the* AAL,
- >since each one is considered to be the answer to a different service.
- >AAL5 is the packet-peoples response when AAL3/4 was considered to be
- >an inefficient answer to packet-peoples requirements.
- >AAL1 and 2 are the proposed answers to the question at the start of
- >this thread (digitised audio). AAL5 is not aimed at providing a better
- >answer to this style of service.
- >
- >gja
-
- I can understand that the CCITT standards groups will define some AAL
- layers to help get the market moving, but technically, what is it inside
- of the ATM network which requires knowledge of the users particular
- AAL usage?
-
- The network just cares about quality of service:
-
- 1) Priority and discard status
- 2) Burst rates, average and deviation
- 3) Latency requirements
-
- What is it about the network which requires knowledge of the user's
- messaging format? The network only needs to decipher set up and control
- messages. Otherwise the network need not define, impose, control, or
- otherwise interfere with the process of defining adaption layer message
- formats. What am I missing?
-