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

RE: [10GBASE-T] Proposed modification to PAR scope

The scope we have seems perfectly fine, and, in line with earlier scopes.  As a reminder, here’s the scope of 10GBASE-CX4


The scope of this project is to specify additions to and appropriate modifications of IEEE Std 802.3 as amended by IEEE Std

802.3ae-2002 (and any other approved amendment or corrigendum) to add a copper Physical Medium Dependent (PMD) option for 10

Gb/s operation, building upon the existing 10GBASE-X Physical Coding Sublayer (PCS) and 10 Gigabit Attachment Unit Interface

(XAUI) specifications.


Note that this scope is broad and could be interpreted to be on any copper medium, but clearly Dan knows what his charter is.  I think we know what 10GBASE-T’s is as well.  The current scope, like the CX4 scope, gives the study group the flexibility to get the job done without going down the line of what is “as specified” (is that at the time of completion of the standard or at the starting time?) what are extensions, etc.


I would oppose the change on the grounds that the limitations really don’t improve clarity, only create ground for argument.


George Zimmerman

tel: (949) 581-6830 ext. 2500

cell: (310) 920-3860

-----Original Message-----
DOVE,DANIEL J (HP-Roseville,ex1) []
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 2:08 PM
To: '';;;
Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] Proposed modification to PAR scope


Brad, Bruce, et al;


I agree with Pat that we should tighten the scope. I am thinking that even the current proposal might be a bit too loose.


For example,  "Specify a Physical Layer (PHY) for operation at 10 Gb/s on horizontal structured copper cabling << as specified by ISO 11801>>, using the existing Media Access Controller, and with extensions to the appropriate physical layer management parameters, of IEEE Std 802.3."




-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:04 PM
Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] Proposed modification to PAR scope



I support the change. The current scope is too wide open with respect to the type of PHY being defined. Almost anything, e.g. a 100 MHz PHY for coaxial cable, would fit within "to add a copper Physical Layer (PHY) specification." Tweaking the text to make the intended direction more clear is very appropriate. If there is a specific point in Howard's suggestion that you feel is too limiting, then suggest an alternative.




-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tolley []
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 9:57 AM
To: Booth, Bradley;
Subject: Re: [10GBASE-T] Proposed modification to PAR scope


I do not support this change. I think the PAR and objectives already make it perfectly clear that we are only defining a PHY.


At 08:58 AM 9/24/2003 -0700, Booth, Bradley wrote:


Howard Frazier has proposed the following modification to the scope of the 10GBASE-T PAR to help narrow the focus and prevent the interpretation that the Study Group is planning to make modifications to the MAC, and to make sure the Study Group is focused on the horizontal structured copper cabling environment:

   Specify a Physical Layer (PHY) for operation at 10 Gb/s
   on horizontal structured copper cabling, using the existing
   Media Access Controller, and with extensions to the appropriate
   physical layer management parameters, of IEEE Std 802.3.

Is there any feedback on this proposed modification?

Brad Booth

Chair, 10GBASE-T Study Group


Bruce Tolley

Senior Manager, Emerging Technologies

Gigabit Systems Business Unit

Cisco Systems

170 West Tasman Drive


San Jose, CA 95134-1706


ip phone: 408-526-4534


"Don't put your hiking boots in the oven unless you plan on eating them."


Colin Fletcher, The Complete Walker