Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [10GBASE-T] Auto-Negotiation Support

Rich, et. Al.,

I raised this issue at the SG in Vancouver.  Bob Grow pointed out that
the auto-negotiation capabilities one chooses to support for a given
device is implementation specific and thus is not specified in the
standard.  The way I see it, one vendor can choose to build a NIC that
will negotiate all speeds and another can build a NIC that only supports
10GBASE-T and as long as they use the same AN protocol (clause 28) to
interoperate that's fine.  I'll but the lowest cost device that meets my

Best regards,


Michael J. Bennett
Sr. Network Engineer
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
Tel. 510.486.7913

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>] On Behalf Of
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 9:34 AM
> To:;
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] Auto-Negotiation Support
> But, what if is not just a stand alone NIC? I can see embedded
> applications
> that would require operation in low power modes. Why limit the
> applications?
> Is there a significant cost associated with the trade off of
> auto-negotiation at 100/1000/10000 Mbps vs. 1000/10000 Mbps. If so,
> someone clarify the cost implications?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Koenen, David []
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 10:24 AM
> To:
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] Auto-Negotiation Support
> Microsoft has the only WOL support requirement I know of.  It is an
> optional
> feature in PCI/PCI Power Management Specs.  Microsoft's requirement is
> that
> the Desktop/Server support WOL on a least one NIC.  That can be
> accomplished
> by most all of the Fast (10/100) or Gigabit (10/100/1000T) embedded or
> standup NICs today and possibly 1000SX in the near future.  We're
> considering the 10GBase-T to be a high speed, stand-alone option NIC.
> which case, it doesn't require WOL.
> : djk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 9:03 AM
> To:
> Subject: [10GBASE-T] Auto-Negotiation Support
> Is the study group considering the PCI and PCI-E power management
> requirements for an add-in adapter implementation of 10GBASE-T? To my
> knowledge the low power management requirement can only be met by the
> current 1000Base-T controllers when running at 10/100 Mpbs. Hence, I
> see
> the need for supporting auto-negotiation that includes 100Base-T and
> 1000Base-T. The controller should be able to negotiate down to 100
> when
> operating in a lower power mode i.e. Wake on LAN or remote
> IPMI).