On Dec 14, 2009, at 6:19 AM, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
On 14/12/2009 15:05, Aaron Brown wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 7:47 AM, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
Hello,
As agreed at the last OGF, Inder and I have worked on the definitions of Network, Topology and Domain.
- Topology: A connected graph of Network Elements The intended usage of this is to describe the thing that a network provider advertises to others as his network topology that is available for use.
So, in a case where a network has two disjoint subsets (e.g. Northrop Grumman's two campuses), they'll advertise two separate topologies?
Exactly.
Jeroen.
To be the devil's advocate, this leads to a situation where, for example, a single GOLE that provides different services (i.e. lightpath and vlan and SDH with no translation/encapsulation/ multiplexing capabilities), will need to provide a separate "topology" per service, since the optical switch is not "connected" to the ethernet switch. Does that make sense? It looks unnecessarily complex to me. If we had the concept of a "connected subgraph" of a domain or topology, that might help with things.. a network provider would advertise a single topology object that would contain one or more of these.