home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- Fascicle II.3 _ Rec. E.522 11
-
- All drawings appearing in this Recommendation have been done in
- Autocad.
-
-
-
- Recommendation E.522
-
- NUMBER OF CIRCUITS IN A HIGH_USAGE GROUP
-
-
- 1 Introduction
-
- For the economic planning of an alternate routing network the
- number of circuits in a high_usage group should be determined so
- that the annual charges for the whole network arrangement are at a
- minimum. This is done under the constraint that given requirements
- for the grade of service grade of service are fulfilled. In the
- optimum arrangement, the cost per erlang of carrying a marginal
- amount of traffic over the high_usage route or over the alternative
- route is the same.
-
-
- Figure 1/E.522 - CCITT 48090
-
-
-
-
-
- The optimum number of high_usage circuits, n, from one
- exchange (1) to another exchange (2) is therefore obtained from the
- following expression when the overflow traffic overflow traffic is
- routed over a transit exchange T (route 1_T_2, see Figure 1/E.522).
-
- Fn(A) = A {E1, n(A) _ E1, (n + 1) (A)} = M x
-
-
- A is the traffic flow offered, for the relation "1_2", in the
- Erlang loss formula for a full availability group full availability
- group. The expression Fn(A) gives the marginal occupancy1)
- (improvement function) for the high_usage group, if one more
- circuit were added.
-
- M is the marginal utilization factor2) for the final route
- "1_T_2" (which has nothing to do with cost ratio), if one
- additional circuit were provided. The annual charges are marginal
- charges for adding one additional circuit to route "1_2" and
- likewise to route "1_T_2".
-
- Planning of an alternate routing network is described in the
- technical literature (see [1] to [10]).
-
- Annual charge as used in this Recommendation refers to
- investment costs.
-
-
- 2 Recommended practical method
-
- 2.1 Field of application
-
- It must be recognized that the conditions applying to
- alternative routing will vary widely between the continental
- network and the intercontinental network. Significant differences
- between the two cases apply to the length and cost of circuits, the
- traffic flow and the different times at which the busy hours occur.
- The method described attempts to take account of these factors in
- so far as it is practicable to do so in any simplified procedure.
-
- 2.2 Traffic statistics
-
- The importance of reliable traffic estimates should be
- emphasized. Traffic estimates are required for each of the
- relations in question, for both the busy hour busy hour of the
- relation and for the busy hour of each link of the routes to which
- the traffic overflows. Since this may be affected by the high_usage
- arrangements finally adopted, it will be necessary to have traffic
- estimates for each relation covering most of the significant hours
- of the day. This applies particularly to the intercontinental
- network where the final routes carry traffic components with widely
- differing busy hours.
-
- 2.3 Basis of the recommended method
-
- The method is based on a simplification of the economic
- dimensioning equations described under 1. Introduction. The
- simplifying assumptions are:
- i)the ratios of the alternative high_usage annual charges are
- grouped in classes and a single ratio selected as
- representative for each class. This is acceptable because
- total network costs are known to be relatively insensitive
- to changes in the annual charges ratio;
- ii) the marginal utilization factor M applicable to the
- overflow routes is regarded as constant within a range of
- circuit group sizes;
-
-
- Size of group (number Value of M
- of circuits)
-
-
- For less than 0.6
- 10....................
- .....................
-
-
- For 10 or 0.8
- more..................
- ......................
- ...
-
- iii) each high_usage group will be dimensioned against the
- cheapest alternative route to which traffic overflows.
- (That is, the effect of parallel alternative routes is
- ignored.)
-
- Where greater precision is required in either network or
- individual route dimensioning, more sophisticated methods may be
- employed (see [5] and [7]).
-
- 2.4 Determination of cost ratio
-
- In continental and intercontinental working, the number of
- circuits to be provided in high_usage circuit groups depends upon
- the ratio of the annual charges estimated by the Administrations
- involved. The annual charge ratio (see Table 1/E.522) is defined
- as:
-
- R =
-
-
- The "annual charge of one additional circuit on the
- alternative route" is calculated by summing:
- _ the annual charge per circuit of each link comprising the
- alternative route, and
- _ the annual charge of switching one circuit at each
- intermediate switching centre.
-
- When a third Administration is involved, it may be necessary
- to calculate the annual charge for switching at the intermediate
- centre from the transit switching charge per holding minute3). This
- may be done as follows:
-
- Annual charges for switching = M x 60 x F x 26 x 12 x transit
- switching charge per holding minute.
-
- In the calculation of the conversion factor F from busy hour
- to day, its dependence on the traffic offered to the high usage
- route, the overflow probability and the time difference should be
- taken into account. As a guideline, Table 1/E.522, which is
- calculated using the standard traffic profiles of Table 1/E.523,
- may be used.
-
-
- TABLE 1/E.522
-
- Offere Overflo Time difference
- d w
- traffi probabi
- c lity
- (erlan (%)
- gs) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-
-
- 1 2. 3. 3. 3. 2. 2. 2. 1. 3. 2. 2. 2. 2.
- 6 2 7 8 7 3 3 7 2 4 2 0 7
- 10 3. 4. 4. 4. 3. 3. 3. 2. 4. 3. 2. 2. 3.
- 7 5 8 7 5 1 0 5 1 2 9 8 6
- 20 4. 5. 5. 5. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4.
- 5 2 4 3 0 7 5 1 7 8 4 4 2
- 5 30 5. 5. 6. 5. 4. 4. 4. 3. 5. 4. 3. 4. 4.
- 1 8 0 8 6 2 0 7 1 3 9 0 8
- 40 5. 6. 6. 6. 5. 4. 4. 4. 5. 4. 4. 4. 5.
- 7 4 5 3 1 7 5 2 6 8 4 6 3
- 50 6. 6. 7. 6. 5. 5. 5. 4. 6. 5. 5. 5. 5.
- 3 9 0 8 6 2 0 7 0 3 0 1 8
-
-
- 1 2. 2. 3. 3. 2. 2. 2. 1. 2. 2. 2. 1. 2.
- 1 6 3 5 5 1 1 4 8 0 0 8 4
- 10 3. 4. 4. 4. 3. 2. 2. 2. 3. 2. 2. 2. 3.
- 2 0 4 3 1 7 6 1 8 8 6 4 2
- 20 4. 4. 5. 4. 3. 3. 3. 2. 4. 3. 3. 3. 3.
- 0 8 1 9 6 3 1 7 3 4 0 0 8
- 10 30 4. 5. 5. 5. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4.
- 7 4 6 4 2 8 6 3 8 9 4 6 4
- 40 5. 6. 6. 5. 4. 4. 4. 3. 5. 4. 4. 4. 4.
- 3 0 1 9 7 4 2 8 3 4 0 2 9
- 50 5. 6. 6. 6. 5. 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 4. 4. 5.
- 9 6 7 4 3 9 7 4 7 0 6 8 5
-
-
- 1 1. 2. 2. 3. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 2.
- 6 0 8 1 2 8 0 2 4 7 8 6 1
- 10 2. 3. 3. 3. 2. 2. 2. 1. 3. 2. 2. 2. 2.
- 7 3 9 9 7 4 3 7 3 4 3 0 7
- 20 3. 4. 4. 4. 3. 2. 2. 2. 3. 3. 2. 2. 3.
- 5 2 6 4 2 8 7 2 9 0 6 5 3
- 25 30 4. 5. 5. 5. 3. 3. 3. 2. 4. 3. 3. 3. 3.
- 2 0 2 0 7 4 2 8 4 5 0 1 9
- 40 4. 5. 5. 5. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4. 4. 3. 3. 4.
- 8 6 8 5 3 9 8 4 9 0 5 7 5
- 50 5. 6. 6. 6. 4. 4. 4. 4. 5. 4. 4. 4. 5.
- 5 2 3 1 9 5 3 0 4 6 1 4 1
-
-
- 1 1. 1. 2. 2. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 2.
- 3 7 4 9 1 6 0 1 1 5 6 4 0
- 10 2. 2. 3. 3. 2. 2. 2. 1. 3. 2. 2. 1. 2.
- 3 8 5 6 5 2 1 4 1 2 2 8 4
- 20 3. 3. 4. 4. 3. 2. 2. 1. 3. 2. 2. 2. 3.
- 1 9 3 2 0 6 4 9 7 7 5 2 0
- 50 30 3. 4. 5. 4. 3. 3. 2. 2. 4. 3. 2. 2. 3.
- 9 7 0 8 4 1 9 5 2 3 8 8 6
- 40 4. 5. 5. 5. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4. 3. 3. 3. 4.
- 6 4 6 3 0 7 5 2 7 8 2 5 3
- 50 5. 6. 6. 5. 4. 4. 4. 3. 5. 4. 3. 4. 4.
- 3 0 1 9 7 3 2 8 2 3 8 2 9
-
- Note _ Linear interpolation may be used to obtain intermediate
- results.
-
- The value determined for R should then be employed to select
- in Table 2/E.522 the precise (or next higher) value of annual
- charges ratio for use in traffic tables. The value of annual
- charges ratios may be grouped in the following general sets:
- a)Within a single continent or other smaller closely
- connected land mass involving distances up to 1000 miles,
- high traffic and frequently one_way operation:
-
- Annual charges ratio: R = 1.5; 2.0; 3.0; 4.0; 5.0; 6.0 and 7.04)
-
- b) Intercontinental working involving long distances, small
- traffic and usually two_way operation:
-
- Annual charges ratio: R = 1.1; 1.3; 1.5; 2.0; 3.0; 4.0 and 5.0.4)
-
- 2.5 Use of method
-
- High_usage circuit groups carrying random traffic can be
- dimensioned from Table 2/E.522.
-
- Step 1 _ Estimate the annual charges ratio R as described
- under 2.4 above. (There is little difference between adjacent
- ratios.) If this ratio is difficult to estimate, the values
- underlined in a) and b) of 2.4 above, should be used.
-
- Step 2 _ Consult Table 2/E.522 to determine the number of
- high_usage circuits N.
-
- Note _ When two values of N are given the right_hand figure
- applies to alternative routes of more than 10 circuits, the
- left_hand figure applies to smaller groups. The left_hand figure is
- omitted when it is no longer possible for the alternative route to
- be small.
-
-
- 3 24_hour traffic profiles
-
- The traffic value used in the method in 2 should be the
- value of traffic offered to the high_usage route during the busy
- hour of the final route. In the case that some of the busy hours of
- the circuit groups or links forming an alternative route do not
- coincide with the busy hour of the relation, the ensuing method
- should be followed to take 24_hour traffic profiles into account
- (see [6], [8] and [9]).
-
- The method consists of the following three basic steps:
- i)prepare hourly traffic demands for which dimensioning is to
- be done;
- ii) size all circuit groups, high usage and final, for one
- hourly traffic demand;
- iii) iterate the process in step ii) for each additional
- hourly matrix.
-
- 3.1 Preparation of hourly traffic demands
-
- Each Administration gathers historical traffic data on an
- hourly basis in accordance with Recommendations E.500 and E.523.
- Using historical data and information contained in Recommendation
- E.506, hourly traffic demand forecasts are made, resulting in a
- series of hourly demands for each exchange to every other exchange.
-
- 3.2 Sizing circuit groups for one_hourly traffic demand
-
- Using the methods in 2 and Recommendation E.521, trunk group
- sizes are prepared for the first hourly traffic demand disregarding
- other hourly traffic demands.
-
- Table 2/E.552 is in file named "T2-552E.doc", must be printed on
- landscape
-
- 3.3 Iterating for each additional hourly traffic matrix
-
- In sizing the circuit groups for the second hourly traffic
- demand, the method is provided with the circuit quantities
- resulting from the previous step, and is constrained solely to
- increasing circuit group sizes; i.e., if the circuit group sizes
- for the first hourly traffic demand were greater than for the
- second hourly demand, then the circuit group sizes for the first
- hourly traffic demand would be retained.
-
- All additional hourly traffic demands are processed in the
- same iterative manner. The resulting circuit group sizes then
- satisfy the traffic demands for all hours being considered (see
- Annex A for a computational example).
-
- 3.4 Processing sequence
-
- Processing may start with the first hour of traffic demand,
- however, experiments have indicated that efficiencies of the
- network can be improved if processing starts with the hour with the
- smallest total traffic demand. It should be noted that this method
- gives us suboptimal networks, which may be improved by manual
- refinements.
-
-
- 4 Minimum outlay alternate routing networks
-
- The method below allows Administrations to adjust alternate
- routing networks to take into account existing revenue accounting
- divisions.
-
- The method consists of the following steps:
- i)Obtain 24_hour traffic profiles in accordance with
- Recommendations E.500 and E.523;
- ii) Compute circuit quantities and costs for a no_overflow
- network in accordance with Recommendation E.520;
- iii) Compute monthly overflow minutes (holding time) at
- varying percentages of busy_hour overflow. This is done by
- applying three conversion factors to the busy hour overflow
- erlangs:
- _ Ratio of holding minutes to erlangs: a fixed value of
- 60.
- _ Daily overflow to busy_hour overflow ratio: a value that
- depends on the 24_hour traffic profile and the degree of
- overflow.
- _ Monthly overflow to daily overflow ratio (Recommendation
- E.506): a value that depends on the day_to_day pattern
- within a month and the degree of overflow.
- iv) Starting with the network calculated in step ii):
- _ reduce the high usage circuits by one circuit,
- _ calculate overflow to final circuit groups,
- _ dimension final circuit groups in accordance with
- Recommendation E.521,
- _ calculate circuit costs and transit charges;
- v)Iterate step iv) until the minimum outlay (circuit costs
- plus transit charges) for terminal administrations is
- reached (see Annex B for computational example).
-
-
- 5 Service considerations
-
- On intercontinental circuits, where both_way operation is
- employed, a minimum of two circuits may be economical. Service
- considerations may also favour an increase in the number of direct
- circuits direct circuits provided, particularly where the annual
- charges ratio approaches unity.
-
- Although the dimensioning of high_usage groups is normally
- determined by traffic flows and annual charges ratios, it is
- recognized that such groups form part of a network having service
- requirements relative to the subscriber. The ability to handle the
- offered traffic with acceptable traffic efficiency should be
- tempered by the overall network considerations on quality of
- service.
-
- The quality of service feature, which is of primary importance
- in a system of high_usage and final circuit groups, is the
- advantage derived from direct circuits versus multi_link
- connections. A liberal use of direct high_usage circuit groups,
- taking into account the economic factors, favours a high quality of
- service to the subscriber. It is recommended that new high_usage
- groups should be provided whenever the traffic flow and cost ratios
- are not conclusive. This practice may result in direct high_usage
- groups direct high_usage groups of two circuits or more.
-
- The introduction of high_usage groups improves the overall
- grade of service and provides better opportunities of handling
- traffic during surges and breakdown conditions. When high_usage
- links bypass the main final routes the introduction of high_usage
- routes can assist in avoiding expenses which might otherwise be
- incurred in keeping below the maximum number of long_distance links
- in series. In the future, more measurements of traffic flows may be
- necessary for international accounting purposes and high_usage
- circuits should make this easier.
-
-
-
- ANNEX A
- (to Recommendation E.522)
-
- Example of network dimensioning taking into account
- 24_hour traffic profiles
-
- A.1 Assumptions (see also Figure A_1/E.522)
-
- Calculations are performed under the following conditions:
- 1)Time difference:
- A is 9 hours west of B
- C is 5 hours west of A
- B is 10 hours west of C
- 2)Traffic profiles:
- 24_hour traffic profiles as per Table 1/E.523 are used.
- 3)Busy hour traffic:
- A_B 50 erlangs
- A_C 100 erlangs
- C_B 70 erlangs
- 4)Cost ratio:
- R = 1.3
-
-
- Figure A_1/E.522 - CCITT 69331
-
-
-
-
-
- A.2 Numerical results
-
- 24 hourly traffic demands are processed. The order of
- processing are from the hour with the smallest total traffic demand
- to the hour with the largest total traffic demand. Computational
- results are given in Table A_1/E.522.
-
-
- TABLE A_1/E.522
- Numerical results
- Number of
- circuits Number of
- Hou Hourly traffic obtained by circuits Number of
- r demand single hour obtained circuits
- dimensioning considering required to
- (disregarding lower bounds meet multiple
- lower bounds imposed by the hourly traffic
- imposed by the previous demands
- previous iterative
- iterative stage
- stage)
- A_B A_C C_B A_B A_C C_B A_B A_C C_B A_B A_C C_B
- 6 17. 5.0 3.5 17 19 17 17 19 17 17 19 17
- 50 0 0
- 7 20. 5.0 3.5 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18
- 00 0 0
- 5 2.5 5.0 28. 1 14 41 19 11 39 19 20 39
- 0 0 00
- 4 2.5 5.0 35. 1 14 49 19 11 47 19 20 47
- 0 0 00
- 8 37. 5.0 3.5 37 23 22 19 38 37 19 38 47
- 50 0 0
- 9 40. 5.0 3.5 39 24 23 19 41 40 19 41 47
- 00 0 0
- 3 2.5 5.0 45. 1 14 61 19 11 59 19 41 59
- 0 0 50
- 18 2.5 50. 3.5 1 66 12 19 64 9 19 64 59
- 0 00 0
- 10 50. 5.0 3.5 49 26 25 9 61 59 19 64 59
- 00 0 0
- 19 2.5 60. 3.5 1 77 12 19 75 9 19 75 59
- 0 00 0
- 20 2.5 60. 3.5 1 77 12 19 75 9 19 75 59
- 0 00 0
- 22 12. 30. 24. 12 45 39 12 45 39 19 75 59
- 50 00 50
- 2 2.5 5.0 63. 1 14 80 19 11 78 19 75 78
- 0 0 00
- 17 2.5 70. 3.5 1 87 12 19 85 9 19 85 78
- 0 00 0
- 1 2.5 5.0 70. 1 14 87 19 11 85 19 85 85
- 0 0 00
- 23 20. 20. 42. 19 36 60 19 36 60 19 85 85
- 00 00 00
- 11 47. 25. 17. 47 46 38 3 85 77 19 85 85
- 50 00 50
- 21 12. 55. 24. 12 73 39 12 73 39 19 85 85
- 50 00 50
- 12 42. 30. 21. 42 50 41 3 85 76 19 85 85
- 50 00 00
- 16 2.5 90. 3.5 1 109 12 19 107 9 19 107 85
- 0 00 0
- 0 20. 20. 66. 19 36 87 19 36 87 19 107 87
- 00 00 50
- 13 30. 65. 35. 29 86 54 5 107 76 19 107 87
- 00 00 00
- 15 17. 100 28. 17 121 44 19 120 43 19 120 87
- 50 .00 00
- 14 27. 95. 38. 27 117 57 19 124 64 19 124 87
- 50 00 50
-
- This example relates to an intercontinental network where busy
- hours of the three traffic relations are widely different among
- each other. The busy hour of the relation A_C, i.e. hour 15, is a
- low traffic period for the
- relations A_B and C_B. The busy hour of the relation C_B, i.e. hour
- 1, is a low traffic period for the relations A_B and A_C.
- Similarly, the busy hour of the relation A_B, i.e. hour 10, is a
- low traffic period for the relations A_C and C_B.
-
- In this case, the single hour dimensioning method, where
- traffic data during the busy hour of the final circuit group are
- used for dimensioning, cannot be applied. If the single hour
- dimensioning method is applied, this results in considerable
- under_dimensioning.
-
- If all the circuit groups are dimensioned as final, the
- required number of circuits are 64, 117 and 85 for the circuit
- groups A_B, A_C and C_B, respectively. About 14% of the total
- number of circuits is saved by the use of alternate routing.
-
-
-
- ANNEX B
- (to Recommendation E.522)
-
- Example of minimum outlay network dimensioning
-
-
- Figure B_1/E.522 - CCITT 69321
-
-
-
-
-
- B.1 Assumptions (see also Figure B_1/E.522)
-
- Calculations are performed under the following conditions:
- 1)Time difference:
- A is 3 hours west of B
- A is 3 hours west of C
- No time difference between B and C
- 2)Traffic profiles:
- 24_hour traffic profiles as per Table 1/E.523 are used.
- 3)Busy hour traffic:
- A_B 16 erlangs
- A_C 33 erlangs
- C_B 33 erlangs
- 4)Each Administration monthly cost per circuit:
- A_B 1000 units
- A_C 1000 units
- C_B 800 units
- 5)Transit charge per holding minute to each terminal
- Administration:
- 1/2 unit
- 6)Conversion factors:
- i)Holding minutes/erlangs: 60
- ii) Daily overflow/busy hour overflow
- This conversion factor (F) is calculated according to
- the guideline given in 2.4.
- iii)Monthly overflow/daily overflow: 26
- where medium social contact per Recommendation E.502 is
- assumed.
- 7)Grade_of_service (GOS) on final circuit groups: 0.01
-
- B.2 Numerical results
-
- Numerical results are shown in Table B_1/E.522. The number of
- circuits C_B does not increase because of the 24_hour traffic
- profiles matching. The number of high usage circuits A_B in the
- minimum outlay network is larger than that in the minimum cost
- network. The impact of considering transit charges in dimensionings
- is always in the direction of less overflow.
-
-
- TABLE B_1/E.522
- Numerical results
-
- Network results Economic results (x 1000 units/month)
-
-
- Busy_hou
- r Number of Circuit Transit Total outlay
- overflow circuits costs charges
- probabil
- ity
-
-
- A_B A_C C_B A B C A B C A B C
-
-
- 0.0000 25 45 45 70 61 81 _ _ _ 70. 61. 81.
- 0 0 0
- 0.0090 25 45 45 70 61 81 0.3 0.3 (0. 70. 61. 80.
- 7) 3 3 3
- 0.0151 24 45 45 69 60 81 0.6 0.6 (1. 69. 60. 79.
- 3) 6 6 7
- 0.0221 23 45 45 68 59 81 0.9 0.9 (1. 68. 59. 79.
- 9) 9 9 1
- 0.0331 22 46 45 68 58 82 1.4 1.4 (2. 69. 59. 79.
- 9) 4 4 1
- 0.0471 21 46 45 67 57 82 2.1 2.1 (4. 69. 59. 77.
- 2) 1 1 8
- 0.0641 20 46 45 66 56 82 3.0 3.0 (6. 69. 59. 76.
- 0) 0 0 0
- Minimum
- outlay
- for A and B
- 0.0861 19 47 45 66 55 83 4.2 4.2 (8. 70. 59. 74.
- 4) 2 2 5
- 0.1121 18 47 45 65 54 83 5.7 5.7 (11 70. 59. 71.
- .5) 7 7 5
- Minimum cost
- network
- 0.142 17 48 45 65 53 84 7.6 7.6 (15 72. 60. 68.
- .1) 6 6 9
-
- 0.175 16 49 45 65 52 85 9.7 9.7 (19 74. 61. 65.
- .4) 7 7 6
-
-
-
- References
-
- [1] WILKINSON (R. I.): Theories for toll traffic engineering in
- the USA, Bell Syst. Tech. J., 1956, No. 35, pp. 421_514.
-
- [2] WILKINSON (R. I.): Simplified engineering of single stage
- alternate routing systems, Fourth International Teletraffic
- Congress, London, 1964.
-
- [3] RAPP (Y.): Planning of junction network in a multi_exchange
- area. 1. General Principles, Ericsson Tech; 1964, No. 20, 1,
- pp. 77_130.
-
- [4] LEVINE (S. W.) and WERNANDER (M. A.): Modular engineering of
- trunk groups for traffic requirements, Fifth International
- Teletraffic Congress, New York, 1967.
-
- [5] PRATT (C. W.): The concept of marginal overflow in alternate
- routing, Fifth International Teletraffic Congress, New York,
- 1967.
-
- [6] EISENBERG (M.): Engineering traffic networks for more than one
- busy hour, Bell System Tech. J., 1977, Vol. 56, pp. 1_20.
-
- [7] AKIMARU (H.) et al.: Derivatives of Wilkinson formula and
- their application to optimum design of alternative routing
- systems, Ninth International Teletraffic Congress,
- Torremolinos, 1979.
-
- [8] HORN (R. W.): A simple approach to dimensioning a
- telecommunication network for many hours of traffic demand,
- International Conference on Communications, Denver, 1981.
-
- [9] BESHAI (M. E.): Traffic data reduction for multiple_hour
- network dimensioning, Second International Network Planning
- Symposium, Brighton, 1983.
-
- [10] LINDBERGER (K.): Simple approximations of overflow system
- quantities for additional demands in the optimization, Tenth
- International Teletraffic Congress, Montreal, 1983.
-
-
-
-
- _______________________________
-
- 1) Marginal occupancy is often called LTC (last trunk capacity).
-
- 2) Marginal utilization factor is often called ATC (additional
- trunk capacity).
-
- 3) It may be necessary to calculate transit switching charge per
- holding minute from charge per conversation minute (efficiency
- factor is described in Recommendation E.506).
-
- 4) These values are tentative. Ranges and representative values
- of annual charges ratio require further study.
-