This page describes the UNI, EVC per UNI, and EVC attributes for E-Line Services that support Circuit Emulation as described in MEF 8.
UNI Attributes
A UNI that is an end-point to a CESoETH service is a regular UNI with no specific additional requirements imposed on the UNI. Either UNI type (1, 2.1, 2.2) can be used. Some specific UNI attributes should be set specifically in order to facilitate the CESoETH service.
Attribute | Recommended Setting |
---|---|
UNI Identifier | No additional requirement |
Physical Medium | No additional requirement |
Speed | No additional requirement |
Mode | No additional requirement (full duplex) |
MAC Layer | 802.3-2005 |
UNI MTU Size | No additional requirement |
Service Multiplexing | Yes for EVPL, No for EPL |
Bundling | No |
All to One Bundling | No for EVPL, Yes for EPL |
CE-VLAN ID for untagged and priority tagged frames | No additional requirement |
Maximum number of EVCs | No additional requirement |
Ingress BWP per UNI | No. BWP should be specified on |
Egress BWP per UNI | No |
L2CP Processing | Pass to EVC all L2CPs (except PAUSE) |
EVC per UNI Attributes
The major issue to consider when setting the EVC per UNI attributes for CESoETH is the ingress bandwidth profile (BWP) The service must guarantee CIR at a rate that matches the TDM traffic CBR. Because the packetization process adds additional overhead and because the BWP counts also the ETH headers in some cases, the CIR could be set a little higher compared to the TDM nominal bitrate.
For example, for an EVC carrying E1, the CIR could be set to say 2.2 Mbps, allowing 10% margin. If the service was originally an E3 of 34.368 Mbps, then the CIR could be set to say 38 Mbps.
CBS can be set relatively to a relatively small level since the TDM traffic is very constant with minimal bursts. Since it is important not to drop any 'TDM service' packets, a CBS of 3 times the MTU could be set.
EIR and EBS are set to 0 since ALL traffic must be counted against the SLS. CF and CM are not relevant in such a case.
Attribute | Recommended Setting |
---|---|
UNI EVC ID | No additional requirement |
CE-VLAN ID / EVC Map | No additional requirement |
Ingress BWP per EVC | <CIR=TDM rate + ≈10%>, <CBS=4-8Kbytes>, EIR=EBS=CM=CF=0 |
Ingress BWP per CoS ID | Must not specify |
Egress BWP per EVC | Must not specify |
Egress BWP per CoS ID | Must not specify |
EVC Attributes
The EVC that carries CESoETH can be an EPL or an EVPL. It carries non-VLAN traffic and therefore VLAN and CoS preservation are irrelevant. Since CESoETH uses no L2CP it implies that all L2CP can be discarded by the EVC.
The major issue to consider is the service performance attributes for this single CoS ID service. The Delay and Delay Variation are to be set according to the specific requirements of the customers, but must be kept to a minimum.
Attribute | Recommended Setting |
---|---|
EVC Type | Point to Point |
UNI List | No additional requirement |
EVC MTU Size | No additional requirement |
CE-VLAN ID Preservation | No additional requirement |
CE-VLAN CoS Preservation | No additional requirement |
Unicast Service Frame Delivery | Deliver unconditionally |
Multicast Service Frame Delivery | Deliver unconditionally |
Broadcast Service Frame Delivery | Deliver unconditionally |
L2CP Processing | Discard all L2CPs |
EVC Performance | Frame loss ratio = 0.01% 1-way frame delay = 10ms for 99th percentile 1-way frame delay variation = 1ms for 99th percentile Availability = 99.95% |
Note that the exact values for service performance may be dictated by the appropriate TDM standard or the service requirement that the Subscriber has.