|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Again, I recommend everyone come to the Tutorial on OAM.
OAM is implemented as a sublayer above the MAC, using frames. So, exactly what would be the trouble? Passing frames?
Brad, if this isn't an invitation to get one into trouble, I don't know what is. In any case, my input would be that we need OAM no more than 1000BASE-T does, so I'd favor leaving out of the scope of the 10GBASE-T PHY. If someone wants to implement some level of OAM in a derivative PHY device or use MAC level OAM functions they're free to do so.
Also, from my limited understanding of 802.3ah, OAM for the PHY layer is TBD, so I don't think we can consider the work being done in EFM as useful precedence at this point.
Would you like to make a presentation to that effect? :-)
I see the Study Group as having three options related to OAM in our objectives:
1) state compliance with EFM OAM (and therefore possibly use it in our effort)
2) state that EFM OAM is beyond the scope of 10GBASE-T, excluding it from use within our effort
3) say nothing, and leave the use of EFM OAM capabilities up to those implementing the systems
Which of the three options would you prefer?
Would anyone else like to state a preferred option?
Study group members,