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

Re: [10GBT-Modeling] RE: [10GBT-Cabling] [10GBASE-T] a channel capacity estim...

Albert, Xiaopeng,

Albert's observation that the NEXT limit does not fit the envelope of the 
measurement data must be 
addressed. We need to establish limit(s) > 250 MHz . The measurement data 
test plan request I sent
 to the cabling ad hoc reflector was designed to solicit measurement data to 
use as the basis of establishing 
the worst case limits > 250 MHz.  

Selection of the "best fit" measurement data for modeling will fall-out of 
the measurement data used to 
establish the limits.


Chris DiMinico
MC Communications

In a message dated 2/21/03 10:59:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, writes:

<< Xiaopeng,
 As, I did not participate in the process, I can only offer my
 My understanding of Chris's mail is that the ref. channel for
 1000BASE-T was selected out of measured data such, that it would
 result in a best "parallel" fit wrt imposed by the std limit. Then,
 it was scaled down to represent the WC. (We can always ask Chris
 for more clarification.)
 The situation with NEXT and FEXT is much different because of the
 comb like nature. The envelop has to be drawn with a considerable
 margin to guarantee the spec "pass" in the frequency domain. Again,
 we can ask our cable group for clarification.
 Albert >>