INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION

ITU-T
TELECOMMUNICATION STANDARDIZATION SECTOR OF ITU

G.826
(08/96)

SERIES G: TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS AND MEDIA Digital t a!"#i""i$! "%"t&#" ' Digital !&t($ )" ' *+alit% a!, a-aila.ilit% ta g&t"

Error performance parameters and objectives for international, constant bit rate digital paths at or above the primar rate
ITU/T R&0$##&!,ati$! G1826
(3 &-i$+"l% CCITT R&0$##&!,ati$!)

ITU/T G/SERIES RECOMMENDATIONS T!"#$%I$$I&# $'$TE%$ "#( %E(I"

INTERNATIONAL TELE34ONE CONNECTIONS AND CIRCUITS INTERNATIONAL ANALOGUE CARRIER SYSTEM GENERAL C4ARACTERISTICS COMMON TO ALL ANALOGUE CARRIER/ TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS INDI6IDUAL C4ARACTERISTICS OF INTERNATIONAL CARRIER TELE34ONE SYSTEMS ON METALLIC LINES GENERAL C4ARACTERISTICS OF INTERNATIONAL CARRIER TELE34ONE SYSTEMS ON RADIO/RELAY OR SATELLITE LIN8S AND INTERCONNECTION 9IT4 METALLIC LINES COORDINATION OF RADIOTELE34ONY AND LINE TELE34ONY TRANSMISSION MEDIA CHARACTERISTICS DIGITAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS TERMINAL E*UI3MENTS DIGITAL NET9OR8S G&!& al a"=&0t" D&"ig! $.>&0ti-&" ?$ ,igital !&t($ )" )*alit and availabilit targets N&t($ ) 0a=a.iliti&" a!, ?+!0ti$!" SD4 !&t($ ) 0@a a0t& i"ti0" DIGITAL SECTIONS AND DIGITAL LINE SYSTEM
For further details, please refer to ITU-T List of Recommendations.

G1500'G1599 G1200'G1299 G1700'G1799 G1:00'G1::9 G1:;0'G1:99 G1600'G1699 G1<00'G1<99 G1800'G1899 G1800'G1809 G1850'G1859 G.82+,G.82G1870'G1879 G18:0'G1899 G1900'G1999

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

$T01T RECOMMEN!AT$ON G.826

ERROR PERFORMANCE PARAMETER AN! O"#ECT$%E FOR $NTERNAT$ONA&' CON TANT "$T RATE !$G$TA& PAT( AT OR A"O%E T(E PR$MAR) RATE

*mma+, This Recommendation defines error performance parameters and objectives for international digital paths which operate at or above the primary rate. The objectives given are independent of the physical network supporting the path. This Recommendation is based upon a block-based measurement concept using error detection codes inherent to the path under test. This simplifies in-service measurements. The parameters and objectives are defined accordingly. Annexes A, , ! and " deal with the definition of availability of the path and give specific information concerning #"$, %"$ and cell-based transmission paths.

o*+ce &T'-T Recommendation (.)*+ was revised by &T'-T %tudy (roup ,- .,//--,//+0 and was approved under the 1T%! Resolution 2o. , procedure on the *3th of August ,//+.

-e,.o+d/ ackground block error, lock-based concept, "igital path, 4rror detection codes, 4rror performance objectives, 4rror performance parameters, 4rrored second, &n-service measurements, %everely errored second.

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

FORE2OR! &T' .&nternational Telecommunication 'nion0 is the 'nited 2ations %peciali5ed Agency in the field of telecommunications. The &T' Telecommunication %tandardi5ation %ector .&T'-T0 is a permanent organ of the &T'. The &T'-T is responsible for studying technical, operating and tariff 6uestions and issuing Recommendations on them with a view to standardi5ing telecommunications on a worldwide basis. The 1orld Telecommunication %tandardi5ation !onference .1T%!0, which meets every four years, establishes the topics for study by the &T'-T %tudy (roups which, in their turn, produce Recommendations on these topics. The approval of Recommendations by the 7embers of the &T'-T is covered by the procedure laid down in 1T%! Resolution 2o. , .$elsinki, 7arch ,-,*, ,//-0. &n some areas of information technology which fall within &T'-T8s purview, the necessary standards are prepared on a collaborative basis with &%9 and &4!.

29T4 &n this Recommendation, the expression :Administration; is used for conciseness to indicate both a telecommunication administration and a recogni5ed operating agency.

&T' ,//3 All rights reserved. 2o part of this publication may be reproduced or utili5ed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from the &T'.

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

ii

CONTENT Pa3e , ,., ,.* %cope........................................................................................................................... Application of this Recommendation........................................................................... Transport network layers............................................................................................. ,.*., #"$ and %"$ transport networks ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ,.*.* AT7 connections ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ,.* < <., <.* <.= =., Allocation of end-to-end performance......................................................................... References................................................................................................................... Abbreviations............................................................................................................... The definition and measurement of the block.............................................................. (eneric definition of the block.................................................................................... &n-service monitoring of blocks................................................................................... 9ut-of-service measurements of blocks....................................................................... 4rror performance events and parameters................................................................... "efinitions................................................................................................................... =.,., 4vents ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... =.,.* #arameters ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... =.* =.+ +., +.* &mplications for error performance measuring devices................................................ #erformance monitoring at the near end and far end of a path.................................... 4rror performance objectives...................................................................................... 4nd-to-end objectives.................................................................................................. Apportionment of end-to-end objectives..................................................................... +.*., Allocation to the national portion of the end-to-end path ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... +.*.* Allocation to the international portion of the end-to-end path ......................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

iii

Annex A > !riteria for entry and exit for the unavailable state................................................ A., A.* A.A.< !riteria for a single direction....................................................................................... !riterion for a bi-directional path................................................................................ !riterion for a uni-directional path.............................................................................. !onse6uences on error performance measurements....................................................

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

i4

Pa3e Annex > Relationship between #"$ path performance monitoring and the block-based parameters.................................................................................................................. ., (eneral........................................................................................................................ .,., lock si5e for monitoring #"$ paths ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .,.* Anomalies ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .,.- "efects ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .* .Types of paths............................................................................................................. 4stimation of the performance parameters.................................................................. .< &n-service monitoring capabilities and criteria for declaration of the performance parameters.................................................................................................................. .= 4stimation of performance events at the far end of a path.......................................... .+ "ifferences between Recommendations (.)*+ and 7.*,?? concerning path performance................................................................................................................ .+., (eneral ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .+.* Allocation methodology ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... Annex ! > Relationship between cell-based network performance monitoring and the blockbased parameters........................................................................................................ !., (eneral........................................................................................................................ !.,., !onverting &# measurements into errored blocks ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... !.,.* lock si5e for monitoring %"$ paths ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... !.,.- Anomalies ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... !.,.< "efects
Recommendation G.826 (08/96) 4

......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... !.,.= 7easurement of performance events using aggregate parity error counts ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... !.* !.4stimation of the performance parameters.................................................................. 4stimation of performance events at the far end of a path..........................................

Annex " > Relationship between cell-based network performance monitoring and the blockbased parameters........................................................................................................ "., ".* ".".< (eneral........................................................................................................................ Types of paths............................................................................................................. 4stimation of the performance parameters.................................................................. 4stimation of performance events at the far end of the path.......................................

Appendix & > @low chart illustrating the recognition of anomalies, defects, errored blocks, 4% and %4%...................................................................................................................... Appendix && > it errors and block errors, merits and limitations............................................

Recommendation G.826

(08/96)

4i

Recommendation G.826 ERROR PERFORMANCE PARAMETER AN! O"#ECT$%E FOR $NTERNAT$ONA&' CON TANT "$T RATE !$G$TA& PAT( AT OR A"O%E T(E PR$MAR) RATE (revised in 1996 1 co5e This Recommendation specifies error performance events, parameters and objectives for digital paths operating at bit rates at or above the primary rate. %ubclauses ,., to ,.- give further details. 1.1 A556ication o7 t8i/ Recommendation
,

This Recommendation is applicable to international, constant bit rate digital paths at or above the primary rate. These paths may be based on a #lesiochronous "igital $ierarchy, %ynchronous "igital $ierarchy or some other transport network such as cell-based. This Recommendation is generic in that it defines the parameters and objectives for paths independent of the physical transport network providing the paths. !ompliance with the performance specification of this Recommendation will, in most cases, also ensure that a +< kbitAs connection will meet the re6uirements laid out in Recommendation (.)*, B<C. Therefore, this Recommendation is the only Recommendation re6uired for designing the error performance of transport networks at or above the primary rate. The performance parameters and definitions applied to paths provided using the AT7 layer and the AAD for ! R services .class A, Recommendation &.-+* B,3C0 are for further study. &n accordance with the definition of a digital path, path end points may be located at userEs premises. %ince the performance objectives are intended to satisfy the needs of the future digital network, it must be recogni5ed that such objectives cannot be readily achieved by all of todayEs digital e6uipment and systems. The intent, however, is to encourage e6uipment design such that digital paths will satisfy the objectives in this Recommendation. #aths are used to support services such as circuit switched, packet switched and leased line services. The 6uality of such services, as well as the performance of the network elements belonging to the service layer, is outside of the scope of this Recommendation. The performance objectives are applicable to each direction of the path. The values apply end-to-end over a *3 =?? km $ypothetical Reference #ath .see @igure -0 which may include optical fibre, digital radio relay, metallic cable and satellite transmission systems. The performance of multiplex and crossconnect functions employing AT7 techni6ues is not included in these values. The parameter definitions are block-based, making in-service measurement convenient. &n some cases, the network fabric is not able to provide the basic events necessary to directly obtain the performance parameters. &n these cases, compliance with this Recommendation can be assessed using out-ofservice measurements or estimated by measures compatible with this Recommendation, such as those specified in Annexes , ! and ". 1.2 T+an/5o+t net.o+9 6a,e+/

This Recommendation specifies the error performance of paths in a given transport network layer. Two cases have to be consideredF

The term Gdigital pathG is defined in Recommendation 7.+? B*?C.

1.2.1 P!( and !( t+an/5o+t net.o+9/ @igure , gives the intended scope where AT7 does not form part of the end-to-end path. &t should be noted that end-to-end performance monitoring is only possible if the monitored blocks together with the accompanying overhead are transmitted transparently to the path end points.
A==li0ati$! $? R&0$##&!,ati$! G1826

N&t($ ) Fa. i0B &1g1 3D4B SD4

T57026<0/9:

NOTE ' A a!, A a & =at@ &!, =$i!t" l$0at&, at =@%"i0al i!t& ?a0&"B &1g1 i! a00$ ,a!0& (it@ R&0$##&!,ati$! G1<07 C5D1

@&('R4 ,A(.)*+ A556ication o7 Recommendation G.826 7o+ a non1ATM end1to1end t+an/mi//ion 5at8

1.2.2 ATM connection/ 1here the path forms the physical part of an AT7 connection .see @igure *0, the overall end-to-end performance of the AT7 connection is defined by Recommendation &.-=+ B,+C. &n this case, this Recommendation can be applied with an appropriate allocation to the performance between the path end points where the physical layer of the AT7 protocol reference model .see Recommendation &.-*, B,=C0 is terminated by AT7 cross-connects or switches. AT7 transmission paths in the physical layer correspond to a stream of cells mapped either into a cell-based format or into %"$ or #"$ based frame structures.
U!,& "t+,% R&0$##&!,ati$! I17;6 AAL ATM 3L G1826 all$0at&, ATM 3L 3L G1826 all$0at&, AAL ATM 3L
T5702680/9;

AAL ATM 3L

ATM A,a=atati$! La%& ATM La%& 3@%"i0al La%&

@&('R4 *A(.)*+ A+c8itect*+a6 +e6ation/8i5 :et.een Recommendation/ G.826 and $.;<6 =16>

1.;

A66ocation o7 end1to1end 5e+7o+mance

Allocations of end-to-end performance of ! R paths are derived using the rules laid out in +.* which are length and complexity based. "etailed allocations of (.)*+ performance to the individual components .lines, sections, multiplexers and cross-connects, etc.0 are outside the scope of this Recommendation, but when such allocations are performed, the +.* national and international allocations should be achieved. 2 Re7e+ence/ The following &T'-T Recommendations and other references contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this Recommendation. At the time of publication, the editions indicated were valid. All Recommendations are subject to revisionH all users of this Recommendation are therefore encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent edition of the Recommendations listed below. A list of the currently valid &T'-T Recommendations is regularly published. B,C B*C B-C B<C B=C B+C B3C B)C B/C !!&TT Recommendation (.3?- .,//,0, !h"sical#electrical characteristics of hierarchical di$ital interfaces. &T'-T Recommendation (.3?< .,//=0, %"nchronous frame structures used at 1&'', 6(1), )*'+, +'++ and '' ,(6 -.it#s. &T'-T Recommendation (.3?3. ,//+0, /et0or- node interface for the %"nchronous 1i$ital 2ierarch" (%12 . !!&TT Recommendation (.3-* .,/))0, 3haracteristics of primar" !34 multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at )*'+ -.it#s. !!&TT Recommendation (.3-- .,/))0, 3haracteristics of primar" !34 multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at 1&'' -.it#s. !!&TT Recommendation (.3-< .,/))0, 3haracteristics of s"nchronous di$ital multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at 1&'' -.it#s. !!&TT Recommendation (.3<* .,/))0, %econd order di$ital multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at +''+ -.it#s and usin$ positive 7ustification . !!&TT Recommendation (.3<- .,/))0, %econd order di$ital multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at 6(1) -.it#s and usin$ positive 7ustification . !!&TT Recommendation (.3=, .,/))0, 1i$ital multiple5 e6uipments operatin$ at the third order .it rate of (' (6+ -.it#s and the fourth order .it rate of 1(9 )6' -.it#s and usin$ positive 7ustification. !!&TT Recommendation (.3=* .,/)?0, 3haracteristics of di$ital multiple5 e6uipments .ased on a second order .it rate of 6(1) -.it#s and usin$ positive 7ustification . !!&TT Recommendation (.3== .,/))0, 1i$ital multiple5 e6uipment operatin$ at 1(9 )6' -.it#s and multiple5in$ three tri.utaries at '' ,(6 -.it#s. &T'-T Recommendation (.33= .,//<0, Loss of %i$nal (L8% and 9larm Indication %i$nal (9I% defect detection and clearance criteria. &T'-T Recommendation (.3)- .,//<0, 3haracteristics of s"nchronous di$ital hierarch" (%12 e6uipment functional .loc-s. &T'-T Recommendation (.)*, .,//+0, :rror performance of an international di$ital connection operatin$ at a .it rate .elo0 the primar" rate and formin$ part of an inte$rated services di$ital net0or-.

B,?C B,,C B,*C B,-C B,<C

B,=C B,+C B,3C B,)C B,/C B*?C B*,C B**C

!!&TT Recommendation &.-*, .,//,0, ;-I%1/ !rotocol reference model and its application. &T'-T Recommendation &.-=+ .,//-0, ;-I%1/ 9T4 la"er cell transfer performance. &T'-T Recommendation &.-+* .,//-0, ;-I%1/ 9T4 9daptation La"er (99L functional description. &T'-T Recommendation &.<-* .,//-0, ;-I%1/ User-net0or- interface < !h"sical la"er specification. &T'-T Recommendation &.+,? .,//=0, ;-I%1/ operation and maintenance principles and functions. &T'-T Recommendation 7.+? .,//-0, 4aintenance terminolo$" and definitions. &T'-T Recommendation 7.*,?? .,//=0, !erformance limits for .rin$in$-into-service and maintenance of international !12 paths, sections and transmission s"stems. &T'-T Recommendation 7.*,?, .,//+0, !erformance limits for .rin$in$-into-service and maintenance of international %12 paths and multiple5 sections. A::+e4iation/ @or the purposes of this Recommendation, the following abbreviations are usedF AAD A&% AT7 A' 4 4R -&%"2 &# ! R !4! !R! 4 4"! 4% 4%R @A% $4! $R# &( &%7 &%"2 AT7 Adaptation Dayer Alarm &ndication %ignal Asynchronous Transfer 7ode Administrative 'nit ackground lock 4rror ackground lock 4rror Ratio roadband &%"2 it &nterleaved #arity !onstant it Rate !ell 4rror !ontrol !yclic Redundancy !heck 4rrored lock 4rror "etection !ode 4rrored %econd 4rrored %econd Ratio @rame Alignment %ignal $eader 4rror !heck $ypothetical Reference #ath &nternational (ateway &n-%ervice 7onitoring &ntegrated %ervices "igital 2etwork

D9@ D9% 7 % 2-&%"2 9A7 99% #"$ #4# #D R"& R4& %"$ %4% %4%R %T7 T# T' I! ?

Doss of @rame Alignment Doss of %ignal 7onitoring lock %i5e 2arrow and &%"2 9peration and 7aintenance 9ut-of-%ervice #lesiochronous "igital $ierarchy #ath 4nd #oint #hysical Dayer Remote "efect &ndication Remote 4rror &ndication %ynchronous "igital $ierarchy %everely 4rrored %econd %everely 4rrored %econd Ratio %ynchronous Transport 7odule Transmission #ath Tributary 'nit Iirtual !ontainer

T8e de7inition and mea/*+ement o7 t8e :6oc9 ?.1 Gene+ic de7inition o7 t8e :6oc9
*

This Recommendation is based upon the error performance measurement of blocks. This clause offers a generic definition of the term GblockG as followsF A block is a set of consecutive bits associated with the pathH each bit belongs to one and only one block. !onsecutive bits may not be contiguous in time. Table , specifies the recommended range of the number of bits within each block for the various bit rate ranges. Annexes , ! and " contain information on block si5es of existing system designs. ?.2 $n1/e+4ice monito+in3 o7 :6oc9/

4ach block is monitored by means of an inherent 4rror "etection !ode .4"!0, e.g. it &nterleaved #arity or !yclic Redundancy !heck. The 4"! bits are physically separated from the block to which they apply. &t is not normally possible to determine whether a block or its controlling 4"! bits are in error. &f there is a discrepancy between the 4"! and its controlled block, it is always assumed that the controlled block is in error. 2o specific 4"! is given in this generic definition but it is recommended that for in-service monitoring purposes, future designs should be e6uipped with an 4"! capability such that the probability to detect an error event is /?J assuming #oisson error distribution. !R!-< and &#-) are examples of 4"!s currently used which fulfil this re6uirement.
*

Appendix && contains information on block error versus bit error measurements.

4stimation of errored blocks on an in-service basis is dependent upon the network fabric employed and the type of 4"! available. Annexes , ! and " offer guidance on how in-service estimates of errored blocks can be obtained from the &%7 facilities of the #"$, %"$ and cell-based network fabrics respectively. ?.; O*t1o71/e+4ice mea/*+ement/ o7 :6oc9/

9ut-of-service measurements shall also be block-based. &t is expected that the out-of-service error detection capability will be superior to the in-service capability described in <.*. < E++o+ 5e+7o+mance e4ent/ and 5a+amete+/ <.1 !e7inition/

@or the purposes of this Recommendation, the following definitions apply. <.1.1 E4ent/
;

<.1.1.1 e++o+ed :6oc9 (E")F A block in which one or more bits are in error. <.1.1.2 e++o+ed /econd (E )F A one second period with one or more errored blocks or at least one defect .see 2ote , in =.,.,.-0. <.1.1.; /e4e+e6, e++o+ed /econd ( E )F A one-second period which contains -?J errored blocks or at least one defect. %4% is a subset of 4%. !onsecutive %everely 4rrored %econds may be precursors to periods of unavailability, especially when there are no restorationAprotection procedures in use. #eriods of consecutive %everely 4rrored %econds persisting for T seconds, where * T K ,? .some 2etwork 9perators refer to these events as GfailuresG0, can have a severe impact on service, for example the disconnection of switched services. The only way Recommendation limits the fre6uency of these events is through the limit for the %4%R. .%ee 2otes , and *.0
29T4% , The defects and related performance criteria are listed in the relevant Annexes . , ! or "0 for the different network fabrics #"$, %"$ or cell-based. * To simplify measurement processes, the defect is used in the definition of %4% instead of defining %4% directly in terms of severe errors affecting the path. 1hile this approach simplifies the measurement of %4%, it should be noted that there may exist error patterns of severe intensity that would not trigger a defect as defined in Annexes , ! and ". Thus, these would not be considered as an %4% under this definition. &f in the future such severe user-affecting events were found, this definition will have to be studied again.

<.1.1.? :ac93+o*nd :6oc9 e++o+ (""E) F An errored block not occurring as part of an %4%. <.1.2 Pa+amete+/ 4rror performance should only be evaluated whilst the path is in the available state. @or a definition of the entryAexit criteria for the unavailable state see Annex A. <.1.2.1 e++o+ed /econd +atio (E R)F The ratio of 4% to total seconds in available time during a fixed measurement interval. <.1.2.2 /e4e+e6, e++o+ed /econd +atio ( E R)F The ratio of %4% to total seconds in available time during a fixed measurement interval.

%ee Appendix & containing a flow chart illustrating the recognition of anomalies, defects, errored blocks, 4% and %4%.

<.1.2.; :ac93+o*nd :6oc9 e++o+ +atio (""ER) F The ratio of ackground lock 4rrors . 40 to total blocks in available time during a fixed measurement interval. The count of total blocks excludes all blocks during %4%s. <.2 $m56ication/ 7o+ e++o+ 5e+7o+mance mea/*+in3 de4ice/

There is a large number of devices .test e6uipment, transmission systems, collecting devices, operating systems, software applications0 currently designed to estimate the (.)*, B,<C or 7.*,?? B*,C parameters 4%R and %4%R at bit rates up to the fourth level of the #"$. @or such devices, the (.)*+ parameters 4%R and %4%R may be approximated using the (.)*, criteria, but an approximation of 4R is not possible from measurements based on Recommendation (.)*,. As the block-based concept and the 4R parameter are not defined for Recommendation (.)*,, converting those devices to measure the parameters of this Recommendation is not re6uired. 7aintenance on specific systems and transport paths may re6uire other parameters. #arameters and values can be found in the 7-%eries Recommendations. <.; Pe+7o+mance monito+in3 at t8e nea+ end and 7a+ end o7 a 5at8

y monitoring %4% events for both directions at a single path end point, a network provider is able to determine the unavailable state of the path .see Annex A0. &n some cases, it is also possible to monitor the full set of error performance parameters in both directions from one end of the path. %pecific inservice indicators for deriving far end performance of a path are listed in Annexes , ! and ". 6 E++o+ 5e+7o+mance o:@ecti4e/ 6.1 End1to1end o:@ecti4e/

Table , specifies the end-to-end objectives for a *3 =?? km $R# in terms of the parameters defined in =.,. An international digital path at or above the primary rate shall meet its allocated objectives for all parameters concurrently. The path fails to meet the error performance re6uirement if any of these objectives is not met. The suggested evaluation period is , month. &t is noted that %4% events may occur in clusters, not always as isolated events. A se6uence of GnG contiguous %4% may have a very different impact on performance from GnG isolated %4% events. TA D4 ,A(.)*+ End1to1end e++o+ 5e+7o+mance o:@ecti4e/ 7o+ a 2A <00 9m inte+nationa6 di3ita6 (RP at o+ a:o4e t8e 5+ima+, +ate
Rate 7bitAs itsAblock 4%R %4%R 4R 29T4% @or systems designed prior to ,//+, the 4R objective - ,?<. ecause bit error ratios are not expected to decrease dramatically as the bit rates of transmission systems increase, the block si5es used in evaluating very high bit rate paths should remain within the range ,= ??? to -? ??? itsAblock. #reserving a constant block si5e for very high bit rate paths results in relatively constant 4R and %4%R objectives for these paths. As currently defined, I!-<-<c .Recommendation (.3?3 B-C0 is a +?, 7bitAs path with a block si5e of ,.= to = )?? - =??? ?.?< ?.??* * ,?< .2ote ,0 L= to ,= *??? - )??? ?.?= ?.??* * ,?< L,= to == <??? - *? ??? ?.?3= ?.??* * ,?< L== to ,+? +??? - *? ??? ?.,+ ?.??* * ,?< L,+? to -=?? ,= ???--? ??? .2ote *0 .2ote -0 ?.??* ,?<

3= ,+) itsAblock. %ince this is outside the recommended range for ,+? - -=?? 7bitAs paths, performance on I!-<-<c paths should not be estimated in-service using this table. The 4R objective for I! -<-c using the 3= ,+) bit block si5e is taken to be < ,?<. There are currently no paths defined for bit rates greater than I!-<-<c .L+?, 7bitAs0. "igital sections are defined for higher bit rates and guidance on evaluating the performance of digital sections can be found in +., and in a Recommendation dealing with multiplex section error performance. "ue to the lack of information on the performance of paths operating above ,+? 7bitAs, no 4%R objectives are recommended at this time. 2evertheless, 4%R processing should be implemented within any error performance measuring devices operating at these rates for maintenance or monitoring purposes. @or paths operating at bit rates up to +?, 7bitAs an 4%R objective of ?.,+ is proposed. This value re6uires further study.

"igital paths operating at bit rates covered by this Recommendation are carried by transmission systems .digital sections0 operating at e6ual or higher bit rates. %uch systems must meet their allocations of the end-to-end objectives for the highest bit rate paths which are foreseen to be carried. 7eeting the allocated objectives for this highest bit rate path should be sufficient to ensure that all paths through the system are achieving their objective. @or example, in %"$, an %T7-, section may carry a I!-< path and therefore the %T7-, section should be designed such that it will ensure that the objectives as specified in this Recommendation for the bit rate corresponding to a I!-< path are met.
2ote > 9bjectives are allocated in this Recommendation to the national and international portions of a path. &n the above example, if the %T7-, section does not form a complete national or international portion, the corresponding nationalAinternational allocation must be subdivided to determine the appropriate allocation for the digital section. This is outside the scope of this Recommendation and is covered in a separate Recommendation.

6.2

A55o+tionment o7 end1to1end o:@ecti4e/

The following apportionment methodology specifies the levels of performance expected from the national and international portions of an $R#. @urther subdivision of these objectives is beyond the scope of this Recommendation. .%ee @igure -.0
I!t& /0$+!t % (&1g1 3at@ 0a i&, $-& a S+.#a i!& Ca.l&)

T& #i!ati!g 0$+!t % (N$t& 5) 3E3 (N$t& 2) IG IG

I!t& #&,iat& 0$+!t i&" (N$t& 7)

T& #i!ati!g 0$+!t % (N$t& 5) 3E3

IG

IG

IG

Nati$!al =$ ti$!

I!t& !ati$!al =$ ti$! 4%=$t@&ti0al R&?& &!0& 3at@ 2< ;00 )#

Nati$!al =$ ti$!

T5706:20/9;

NOTES 5 2 7

I? a =at@ i" 0$!"i,& &, t$ t& #i!at& at t@& IGB $!l% t@& i!t& !ati$!al =$ ti$! all$0ati$! a==li&"1 O!& $ t($ i!t& !ati$!al Gat&(a%" (&!t % $ &Eit) #a% .& ,&?i!&, =& i!t& #&,iat& 0$+!t %1 F$+ i!t& #&,iat& 0$+!t i&" a & a""+#&,1

@&('R4 -A(.)*+ (,5ot8etica6 Re7e+ence Pat8

@or the purposes of this Recommendation the boundary between the national and international portions is defined to be at an &nternational (ateway which usually corresponds to a cross-connect, a higher-order multiplexer or a switch .2-&%"2 or -&%"20. &(s are always terrestrially based e6uipment physically resident in the terminating .or intermediate0 country. $igher-order paths .relative to the $R# under consideration0 may be used between &(s. %uch paths receive only the allocation corresponding to the international portion between the &(s. &n intermediate countries, the &(s are only located in order to calculate the overall length of the international portion of the path in order to deduce the overall allocation. The following allocation methodology applies to each parameter defined in =., and takes into account both the length and complexity of the international path. All paths should be engineered to meet their allocated objectives as described in +.*., and +.*.*. &f the overall allocation exceeds ,??J, then the performance of the path may not fulfil the objectives of Table ,. 2etwork 9perators should note that if performance could be improved in practical implementations to be superior to allocated objectives, the occurrence of paths exceeding the objectives of Table , can be minimi5ed. 6.2.1 A66ocation to t8e nationa6 5o+tion o7 t8e end1to1end 5at8 4ach national portion is allocated a fixed block allowance of ,3.=J of the end-to-end objective. @urthermore, a distance based allocation is added to the block allowance. The actual route length between the #4# and &( should first be calculated if known. The air route distance between the #4# and &( should also be determined and multiplied by an appropriate routing factor. This routing factor is specified as followsF &f the air route distance is K,??? km, the routing factor is ,.=H &f the air route distance is ,??? km and K,*?? km, the calculated route length is taken to be ,=?? kmH &f the air route distance is ,*?? km, the routing factor is ,.*=. 1hen both actual and calculated route lengths are known, the smaller value is retained. This distance should be rounded up to the nearest =?? km .i.e. the two national portions comprise at least =?? km each0. An allocation of ,J per =?? km is then applied to the resulting distance. 1hen a national portion includes a satellite hop, a total allowance of <*J of the end-to-end objectives in Table , is allocated to this national portion. The <*J allowance completely replaces both the distance-based allowance and the ,3.=J block allowance otherwise given to national portions. 6.2.2 A66ocation to t8e inte+nationa6 5o+tion o7 t8e end1to1end 5at8 The international portion is allocated a block allowance of *J per intermediate country plus ,J for each terminating country. @urthermore, a distance based allocation is added to the block allowance. As the international path may pass through intermediate countries, the actual route length between consecutive &(s .one or two for each intermediate country0 should be added to calculate the overall length of the international portion. The air route distance between consecutive &(s should also be determined and multiplied by an appropriate routing factor. This routing factor is specified as follows for each element between &(sF &f the air route distance between two &(s is K,??? km, the routing factor is ,.=H &f the air route distance is ,??? km and K,*?? km, the calculated route length is taken to be ,=?? kmH &f the air route distance between two &(s is ,*?? km, the routing factor is ,.*=. 1hen both actual and calculated route lengths are known, the smaller value is retained for each element between &(s for the calculation of the overall length of the international portion. This overall distance should be rounded up to the nearest =?? km but shall not exceed *+ =?? km. An allocation of ,J per =?? km is then applied to the resulting distance.

M M M

M M M

&n the case where the allocation to the international portion is less than +J, then +J shall be used as the allocation. &ndependent of the distance spanned, any satellite hop in the international portion receives a -=J allocation of the objectives in Table ,. The -=J allowance completely replaces all distance-based and block allowances otherwise given to parts of the international portion spanned by the satellite hop. AnneB A C+ite+ia 7o+ ent+, and eBit 7o+ t8e *na4ai6a:6e /tate A.1 C+ite+ia 7o+ a /in36e di+ection A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of ten consecutive %4% events. These ten seconds are considered to be part of unavailable time. A new period of available time begins at the onset of ten consecutive non-%4% events. These ten seconds are considered to be part of available time. @igure A., illustrates this definition.
Ti#& 50 "&0

50 "&0

F 50 "&0

U!a-aila.ilit% ,&t&0t&, U!a-aila.l& =& i$, S&-& &l% E $ &, S&0$!, E $ &, S&0$!, (!$!/SES) E $ /? && S&0$!,

A-aila.ilit% ,&t&0t&, A-aila.l& =& i$,

T5706:70/9;

@&('R4 A.,A(.)*+ EBam56e o7 *na4ai6a:i6it, dete+mination

A.2 C+ite+ion 7o+ a :i1di+ectiona6 5at8 A bi-directional path is in the unavailable state if either one or both directions are in the unavailable state. This is shown in @igure A.*.

F$ (a , ,i &0ti$!

Aa0)(a , ,i &0ti$! 3at@

T5706::0/9;

U!a-aila.l& "tat&

@&('R4 A.*A(.)*+ EBam56e o7 t8e *na4ai6a:6e /tate o7 a 5at8

A.; C+ite+ion 7o+ a *ni1di+ectiona6 5at8 The criterion for a uni-directional path is defined in A., above. A.? Con/eC*ence/ on e++o+ 5e+7o+mance mea/*+ement/ 1hen a bi-directional path is in the unavailable state, 4% %4% and 4 counts may be collected in both directions and may be helpful in the analysis of the trouble. $owever, it is recommended that these 4%, %4% and 4 counts are not included in estimates of 4%R, %4%R and 4R performance .see =.,.*0. %ome existing systems cannot support this re6uirement to exclude 4%, %4% and 4 counts. @or these systems, the performance of a bi-directional path can be approximated by evaluating the parameters in each direction, independently of the state of availability of the other direction. &t should be noted that this approximation method may result in a worse estimate of performance in the event that only on direction of a bi-directional path becomes unavailable.
29T4 > This is not an issue for uni-directional paths.

AnneB " Re6ation/8i5 :et.een P!( 5at8 5e+7o+mance monito+in3 and t8e :6oc91:a/ed 5a+amete+/ ".1 Gene+a6 ".1.1 "6oc9 /iDe 7o+ monito+in3 P!( 5at8/ The block si5es for in-service performance monitoring of #"$ #aths are given in Table .,. TA D4 .,A()*+ "6oc9 /iDe/ 7o+ P!( 5at8 5e+7o+mance monito+in3
it rate of #"$ path ,=<< kbitAs *?<) kbitAs +-,* kbitAs << 3-+ kbitAs lock si5e according to Table ,A(.)*+ )?? - =??? bits )?? - =??? bits * ??? - )??? bits < ??? - *? ??? bits #"$ block si5e used in Rec. (.)*+ <+-* bits *?<) bits -,=+ bits <3+? bits 4"! !R!-+ !R!-< !R!-= %ingle it #arity !heck .2ote0 Reference *.,A(.3?< B*C *.-A(.3?< *.*A(.3?< ,.- A(.3=* B,?C

29T4 > &t shall be noted that single bit parity check does not satisfy the error detection probability of /?J.

".1.2 Anoma6ie/ &n-service anomaly conditions are used to determine the error performance of a #"$ path when the path is not in a defect state. The two following categories of anomalies related to the incoming signal are definedF an errored frame alignment signalH an 4 as indicated by an 4"!. ".1.; !e7ect/ &n-service defect conditions are used in the (.3-? to (.3=?-%eries of Recommendations relevant to #"$ multiplex e6uipment to determine the change of performance state which may occur on a path. The three following categories of defects related to the incoming signal are definedF

a, a*

d, d* d-

Doss of signalH Alarm indication signalH Doss of frame alignment. @or the * 7bitAs hierarchy, the definition of the D9@ defect condition is given in the (.3-? to (.3=?-%eries of Recommendations. @or some formats of the ,.= 7bitAs hierarchy, the definition of the D9@ defect condition re6uires further study. @or both hierarchies, the definitions of D9% and A&% defect detection criteria are given in Recommendation (.33= B,*C. ".2 T,5e/ o7 5at8/ "epending on the type of in-service monitoring G&%7G facility associated with the #"$ path under consideration, it may not be possible to derive the full set of performance parameters. @our types of paths are identifiedF

T,5e 1E F+ame and :6oc9 /t+*ct*+ed 5at8/ The full set of defect indications d, to d- and anomaly indications a, and a2 are provided by the &%7 facilities. 4xamples of this type of path areF #rimary rate and second order paths with !R! .< to +0 as defined in Recommendation (.3?< B*C. @ourth order paths with a parity bit per frame as defined in Recommendation (.3== B,,C.

> >

T,5e 2E F+ame /t+*ct*+ed 5at8/ The full set of defect indications d, to d- and the anomaly indication a, are provided by the &%7 facilities. 4xamples of this type of path areF #rimary rate up to the fourth order paths in the * 7bitAs hierarchy as defined in Recommendations (.3-* B<C, (.3<* B3C and (.3=, B/C. #rimary rate paths in the ,.= 7bitAs hierarchy as defined in Recommendations (.3-- B=C and (.3-< B+C.

> >

T,5e ;E Ot8e+ 7+ame /t+*ct*+ed 5at8/ A limited set of defect indications d, and d* and the anomaly indication a, are provided by the &%7 facilities. &n addition the number of consecutive errored @A% per second is available. An example of this type of path isF %econd up to the fourth order paths in the ,.= 7bitAs hierarchy as defined in Recommendations (.3<- B)C and (.3=* B,?C.

>

T,5e ?E 0n7+amed 5at8/ A limited set of defect indications d, and d* is provided by the &%7 facilities which do not include any error check. 2o @A% control is available. An example of this type of path isF 4nd-to-end path .e.g. for a leased line0 carried over several higher order paths placed in tandem. ".; E/timation o7 t8e 5e+7o+mance 5a+amete+/ Table .* gives information on which set of parameters should be estimated and the related measurement criteria according to the type of path considered.

>

TA D4 .*A(.)*+ et o7 5a+amete+/ and mea/*+ement c+ite+ia

Type , %et of parameters 4%R %4%R 4R * 4%R %4%R 4%R %4%R < %4%R A 7easurement criteria An 4% is observed when, during one second, at least one anomaly a, or a*, or one defect d, to d- occurs An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least GxG anomalies a, or a*, or one defect d, to d- occurs .2otes , and *0 4 is observed when an anomaly a, or a* occurs in a block not being part of an %4%

An 4% is observed when, during one second, at least one anomaly a, or one defect d, to d- occurs An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least GxG anomalies a, or one defect d, to d- occurs .2ote *0 An 4% is observed when, during one second, at least one anomaly a, or one defect d, or d* occurs An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least GxG anomalies a, or one defect d, or d* occurs .2ote *0 An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least one defect d, or d* occurs .2ote -0

29T4% &f more than one anomaly a , or a* occur during the block interval, then only one anomaly has to be counted. Ialues of GxG can be found in .<. The estimates of the 4%R and %4%R will be identical since the %4% event is a subset of the 4% event.

".? $n1/e+4ice monito+in3 ca5a:i6itie/ and c+ite+ia 7o+ dec6a+ation o7 t8e 5e+7o+mance 5a+amete+/. Table .- is provided for guidance on the criteria for declaration of an %4% event on #"$ paths. The capabilities for the detection of anomalies and defects for the various #"$ signal formats are described in Tables .* to .+A7.*,?? B*,C. These tables also indicate the criteria for declaring the occurrence of an 4% or a %4% condition in accordance with Recommendation (.)*, B,<C criteria taking into account existing e6uipment arrangements. 1hile it is recommended that &%7 capabilities of future systems be designed to permit performance measurements in accordance with this Recommendation, it is recogni5ed that it may not be practical to change existing e6uipment. Table .- lists examples of the &%7 %4% criteria x, for signal formats with 4"! capabilities, implemented prior to this Recommendation. TA D4 .-A(.)*+ C+ite+ia 7o+ dec6a+ation o7 an E e4ent on P!( 5at8/
it rate .kbitAs0 Recommendation 4"! type locksAsecond itsA lock ,=<< (.3?< B*C !R!-+ --<+-* *?<) (.3?< B*C !R!-< ,??? *?<) << 3-+ (.3=* B,?C %ingle it #arity !heck /-/) <3+?

%4% threshold used on e6uipment developed prior to the acceptance of Recommendation (.)*+ &%7 threshold based on Recommendation (.)*+ %4% .-?J 4rrored locks0

x N -*?

x N )?=

x N <= or x N *<<< as suggested in Rec. 7.*,?? B*,C

.2ote *0

.2ote *0

x N *<<< .2ote -0

29T4% &t is recogni5ed that there are discrepancies between the figures above and those given in Table .,A(.)*+. This re6uires further study. "ue to the fact that there is a large population of systems in service, the criteria for declaration of an %4% will not change for the frame formats of these systems. This figure takes into account the fact that, although -?J of the blocks could contain errors, a smaller value will be detected by the 4"! due to the inability of the simple parity code to detect even numbers of errors in a block. &t should be noted that such a simple 4"! is non-compliant with the intent of Recommendation (.)*+. !ompletion of this table for other bit rates is for further study.

".< E/timation o7 5e+7o+mance e4ent/ at t8e 7a+ end o7 a 5at8 The available remote in-service indications such as R"& or, if provided, R4& are used at the near end to estimate the number of %4% occurring at the far end. ".6 !i77e+ence/ :et.een Recommendation/ G.826 and M.2100 conce+nin3 5at8 5e+7o+mance ".6.1 Gene+a6 1hen looking at the differences between Recommendations (.)*+ and 7.*,?? B*,C, it shall be taken into account that the two Recommendations serve a different purpose and can therefore not be compatible in all respects. Recommendation 7.*,?? is a maintenance Recommendation which also allows short-term measurements. &t can be used to indicate that the long-term re6uirements of Recommendation (.)*+ are met. ".6.2 A66ocation met8odo6o3, The allocation methodology used in Recommendation (.)*+ differs from the methods applied in Recommendation 7.*,??. Though there are differences, in most cases the re6uirements of Recommendation (.)*+ are satisfied if the objectives of Recommendation 7.*,?? are met. 1ith regard to the purpose of the intermediate &(s depicted in @igure -, it shall be noted that they are re6uired to calculate route length. AnneB C Re6ation/8i5 :et.een !( 5at8 5e+7o+mance monito+in3 and t8e :6oc91:a/ed 5a+amete+/ C.1 Gene+a6 C.1.1 Con4e+tin3 "$P mea/*+ement/ into e++o+ed :6oc9/ %ubclause =.,., describes error performance events used in defining performance parameters. The method of converting &# measurements into errored blocks is described below. %ince this Recommendation defines a block as consecutive bits associated with a path, each &#-n . it &nterleaved #arity, order GnG0 in the %"$ path overhead pertains to a single defined block. @or the purpose of this annex, a &#-n corresponds to a (.)*+ block. The &#-n is 29T interpreted as checking GnG separate interleaved parity check blocks. &f any of the GnG separate parity checks fails, the block is assumed to be in error.

29T4 > &t shall be noted that &#-* does not satisfy the error detection probability of /?J.

C.1.2 "6oc9 /iDe 7o+ monito+in3 !( 5at8/ The block si5es for in-service performance monitoring of %"$ #aths as specified in Recommendation (.3?3 B-C are given in Table !.,. TA D4 !.,A(.)*+ "6oc9 /iDe/ 7o+ !( 5at8 5e+7o+mance monito+in3
it rate of %"$ path ,++< kbitAs **<? kbitAs +)<) kbitAs <) /+? kbitAs ,=? --+ kbitAs m + )<) kbitAs -< *<? kbitAs +?, -<< ??? kbitAs #ath type I!-,, I!-,* I!-* I!-I!-< I!-*-mc .2ote ,0 I!-*-=c .2ote *0 I!-<-<c +??? - *? ??? bits ,= ??? - -? ??? bits lock si5e according to Table ,A(.)*+ )?? - =??? bits )?? - =??? bits *??? - )??? bits <??? - *? ??? bits +??? - *? ??? bits %"$ block si5e used in (.)*+ )-* bits ,,*? bits -<*< bits +,*? bits ,) 3/* bits -<*< bits ,3 ,*? bits 3= ,+) bits 4"! &#-* &#-* &#-* &#-) &#-) m &#-* &#-* &#-)

29T4% Applies to virtual concatenation. Applies to contiguous concatenation.

C.1.; Anoma6ie/ &n-service anomaly conditions are used to determine the error performance of an %"$ path when the path is not in a defect state. The following anomaly is definedF an 4 as indicated by an 4"!. .%ee !.,.,.0 C.1.? !e7ect/ &n-service defect conditions are used in Recommendations (.3?3 B,-C and (.3)- B,-C relevant to %"$ e6uipment to determine the change of performance state which may occur on a path. Tables !.* and !.- show the defects used in this Recommendation. TA D4 !.*A(.)*+ !e7ect/ +e/*6tin3 in a nea+1end e4e+e6, E++o+ed econd
2ear end defects D# '24P D# T&7 T' D9# T' A&% $# D97 .2ote ,0 $# #D7 $# '24P $# T&7 Applicable to Applicable to lower order paths Oind of path

a,

A' D9# A' A&%

higher order paths

29T4% This defect is not related to I!--. I! A&% defect is not included above as it only applies to a segment of a path. The above defects are path defects only. %ection defects such as 7% A&%, R% T&7, %T7 D9@ and %T7 D9% give rise to an A&% defect in the path layers.

TA D4 !.-A(.)*+ !e7ect/ +e/*6tin3 in a 7a+1end e4e+e6, E++o+ed econd

@ar end defects D# R"& $# R"& Oind of path Applicable to lower order paths Applicable to higher order paths

C.1.< Mea/*+ement o7 5e+7o+mance e4ent/ */in3 a33+e3ate 5a+it, e++o+ co*nt/ This subclause offers guidance for e6uipment designed to sum individual it &nterleaved #arity violations over the entire second instead of using the &#-n lock to detect and count 4rrored locks as recommended in !.,.,. The following text should not be interpreted as a basis for future e6uipment design. Aggregate counts of it &nterleaved #arity . &#0 violations can be used to estimate the number of (.)*+ 4rrored locks. As a simplifying assumption, the aggregate count of individual it &nterleaved #arity violations in a second can be taken to be roughly e6uivalent to the number of (.)*+ 4rrored locks in that second. The following relationship is recommended for both &#-* and &#-), even though it may tend to overestimate errored blocks in case of &#-). 4# whereF 4 # N number of 4rrored locks in the measurement period. N number of individual parity violations in the measurement period.

C.2 E/timation o7 t8e 5e+7o+mance 5a+amete+/ @or %"$ transmission paths, the full set of performance parameters shall be estimated using the following eventsF An 4% is observed when, during one second, at least one anomaly a ,, or one defect according to Tables !.* and !.- occurs. @or the 4% event, the actual count of 4 s is irrelevant, it is only the fact that an 4 has occurred in a second which is significant. An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least GxG 4 s - derived from anomaly a, or one defect according to Tables !.* and !.- occur .see 2ote ,0. A 4 is observed when an anomaly a, occurs in a block not being part of an %4%.
29T4 > The value of GxG is obtained by multiplying the number of blocks per second by ?.- .from the %4% definition0. The &# threshold resulting in an %4% is shown in Table !.< for each %"$ path type. These values should be programmable within %"$ e6uipment.

4%F

%4%F 4F

TA D4 !.<A(.)*+ T8+e/8o6d 7o+ t8e dec6a+ation o7 a /e4e+e6, e++o+ed /econd

#ath type Threshold for %4% .2umber of 4rrored locks in one second0 +?? +?? +?? *<?? *<?? +?? *<??

I!-,, I!-,* I!-* I!-I!-< I!-*-=c I!-<-<c

29T4 > &t is recogni5ed that there are discrepancies between the figures above and those given in Table .-. This re6uires further study.

C.; E/timation o7 5e+7o+mance e4ent/ at t8e 7a+ end o7 a 5at8 The following indications available at the near end are used to estimate the performance events .occurring at the far end0 for the reverse directionF $igher and lower order path R"& and R4& .Recommendation (.3?3 B-C0. $igher or lower order path R4&s are anomalies which are used to determine the occurrence of 4%, 4 and %4% at the far end. $igher or lower order path R"&s are defects which estimate the occurrence of %4% at the far end. AnneB ! Re6ation/8i5 :et.een ce661:a/ed net.o+9 5e+7o+mance monito+in3 and t8e :6oc91:a/ed 5a+amete+/ !.1 Gene+a6 The operation and maintenance function for the transmission path is provided by the @- flow as defined in Recommendation &.+,? B,/C which deals with the general 9A7 principles for the -&%"2. The @- maintenance flow corresponds to the &%7 facilities and is defined, as well as the monitoring block si5e, in Recommendation &.<-* B,)C. The block > as defined in this Recommendation > corresponds to a set of contiguous 7 % cells monitored by a &#-) 4"!. @or the purposes of this Recommendation, the &#-) is not interpreted as checking ) separate interleaved parity check blocks. 9ne &#-) interleaved parity check cannot lead to more than one errored block. 1ithin one &#-) check, if any of the ) separate parity checks fail, the overall block is assumed to be in error. The following categories of anomalies related to the incoming signal on an AT7 transmission path are definedF errored idle or AT7 cell .detected by an 4"! in the @- 9A7 cell0 .see 2ote ,0H errored or corrected header of an idle or AT7 cell .see 2ote *0H errored @- cellF corrected error in the header or error detected by the !ell 4rror !ontrolH loss of a single @- cell.
29T4%

a, a* aa<

An AT7 cell is provided by the AT7 layer.

* Assuming that the &#-) check is executed after the header error check, a single error which occurs in the header of an idle or AT7 cell will be corrected by the $4! mechanism and no errors will be detected by the &#-) 4"! in this case. 2evertheless the corresponding block should be considered as an errored block.

1hen at least one anomaly a, to a< occurs, an 4rrored lock should be counted. &f more than one anomaly occurs for a given block, only one 4 is counted. The following categories of defects related to the incoming signal on an AT7 transmission path are definedF Doss of two consecutive 9A7 cells, in accordance with Recommendation &.<-* B,)CH Transmission path alarm indication signal .T#-A&%0H Doss of cell delineationH Doss of %ignal. !.2 T,5e/ o7 5at8/ Two types of AT7 transmission paths are identifiedF Type ,F #aths corresponding to a stream of cells mapped in a cell-based format. Type * F #aths corresponding to a stream of cells mapped into %"$ or #"$-based frame structures. The full set of performance parameters of this Recommendation and corresponding objectives is applicable to the AT7 transmission path of type ,. The performance parameters and corresponding objectives are applied to underlying %"$ or #"$ paths which support AT7 transmission paths of type *. The applicability of the performance parameters for type * AT7 transmission paths re6uires further study. !.; E/timation o7 t8e 5e+7o+mance 5a+amete+/ @or type , AT7 transmission paths, the full set of (.)*+ performance parameters should be estimated using the following eventsF An 4% is observed when, during one second, at least one anomaly a , to a<, or one defect d, to d< occurs. An %4% is observed when, during one second, at least GxG 4 s > derived from anomalies a , to a< > or one defect d, to d< occur .see 2ote0. A 4 is observed when one anomaly a, to a< occurs in a block not being part of an %4%.
29T4 > The value of GxG is obtained by multiplying the number of blocks per second by ?.- .from the %4% definition0.

d, d* dd<

4%F %4%F 4F

!.? E/timation o7 5e+7o+mance e4ent/ at t8e 7a+ end o7 t8e 5at8 The T#-R"& defect .see Recommendation &.<-* B,)C0 and R4& indications are used at the near end to estimate the (.)*+ performance events occurring at the far end. R4&s are anomalies which are used to determine the occurrence of 4%, the path. 4 and %4% at the far end of

T#-R"&s are defects which estimate the occurrence of %4% at the far end of the path.

A55endiB $ F6o. c8a+t i66*/t+atin3 t8e +eco3nition o7 anoma6ie/' de7ect/' e++o+ed :6oc9/' E and E
E $ /#$!it$

,i"0$-& "

A!$#ali&"

D&?&0t"

a& 0$+!t&, a" 70G =& "&0$!, E $ &, .l$0)" &"+lt i! &"+lt i! a & al(a%" ES 0$!t $l" 0$+!ti!g $? AAE SES

a& &"ti#at$ " ?$

A-aila.ilit% 0$!t $l" 0$+!ti!g $? ,&?i!&

T5708850/9<

@&('R4 &.,A(.)*+ F6o. c8a+t i66*/t+atin3 t8e +eco3nition o7 anoma6ie/' de7ect/' e++o+ed :6oc9/' E ' E and ""E

A55endiB $$ "it e++o+/ and :6oc9 e++o+/' me+it/ and 6imitation/ &n digital transmission technology, any bit received in error > a it 4rror > may deteriorate transmission 6uality. &t is obvious that 6uality will decrease with an increasing number of erroneous

bits. Therefore, the ratio of the number of errored bits referred to the total number of bits transmitted in a given time interval is a 6uantity which can be used to describe digital transmission performance. The 6uantity is called it 4rror Ratio . 4R0 and is a well-known error performance parameter .see definition in @ascicle &.- of the !!&TT ;lue ;oo-0. it 4rror Ratio can only be measured if the bit structure of the evaluated se6uence is known. @or this reason, bit error ratio measurements are mostly carried out using well-defined #seudo-Random it %e6uences .#R %s0. &n practice, the #R % replaces the information sent in-service. This means that 4R can only be measured correctly out-of-service because the bit structure of an arbitrary message is normally unknown. &t was one of the prime objectives of this Recommendation to define all performance parameters in such a way that in-service estimation is possible. Thus, parameter definitions based upon it 4rror Ratios were not chosen in spite of their merits. &n-service detection of errors in digital transmission is possible, however, using special error detection mechanisms .4rror "etection !ode, 4"!0 which are inherent to certain transmission systems. 4xamples of those inherent 4"!s are !yclic Redundancy !heck .!R!0, #arity !heck and observation of it &nterleaved #arity . &#0. 4"!s are capable to detect whether one or more errors have occurred in a given se6uence of bits > the block. &t is normally not possible to determine the exact number of errored bits within the block. lock 4rrors are processed in a similar way as it 4rrors, i.e. the term lock 4rror Ratio is defined as the ratio of the number of errored blocks referred to the total number of blocks transmitted in a given time interval. The basic philosophy of this Recommendation is based upon the measurement of 4rrored locks thus making in-service error estimation possible. &t should be noted that the measurement of it 4rror Ratio and lock 4rror Ratio yields comparable results for small it 4rror Ratios. &t should also be noted that for some specific error models it is possible to calculate it 4rror Ratio from a lock 4rror Ratio. &t is the drawback of this procedure that error models describe the situation found in practice only imperfectly and may be strongly media dependant. Therefore, the result of such a calculation is not very reliable.

$T01T RECOMMEN!AT$ON
%eries A %eries %eries !

ER$E
7eans of expression

9rgani5ation of the work of the &T'-T

(eneral telecommunication statistics %eries " (eneral tariff principles

%eries 4 %eries @

Telephone network and &%"2

2on-telephone telecommunication services e+ie/ G T+an/mi//ion /,/tem/ and media

%eries $ %eries & %eries Q

Transmission of non-telephone signals &ntegrated services digital network

Transmission of sound-programme and television signals %eries O #rotection against interference

%eries D %eries 7

!onstruction, installation and protection of cables and other elements of outside plant 7aintenanceF international transmission systems, telephone circuits, telegraphy, facsimile and leased circuits 7aintenanceF international sound-programme and television transmission circuits %eries 9 %pecifications of measuring e6uipment Telephone transmission 6uality %witching and signalling Telegraph transmission

%eries 2

%eries #

%eries P %eries R %eries % %eries T

Telegraph services terminal e6uipment

Terminal e6uipment and protocols for telematic services %eries ' Telegraph switching

%eries I %eries R

"ata communication over the telephone network "ata networks and open system communication %eries S #rogramming languages