From owner-stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org Wed Mar 1 15:03 GMT 2000 Received: from gatekeeper.pdd.3com.com (gatekeeper [161.71.169.3]) by isolan.pdd.3com.com (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA12556; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:03:38 GMT Received: from ruebert.ieee.org ([199.172.136.3]) by gatekeeper.pdd.3com.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with ESMTP id AAA1F0C; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:01:57 +0000 Received: by ruebert.ieee.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA28875; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:24:46 -0500 (EST) From: "Edward Chang" To: "Mike Wincn" , , , Subject: RE: PAM-5, what are your BERs ? Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:29:42 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20000229140457.00a7e6e0@192.168.2.12> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org Precedence: bulk X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients X-Listname: stds-802-3-hssg X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majordomo@majordomo.ieee.org X-Moderator-Address: stds-802-3-hssg-approval@majordomo.ieee.org X-Lines: 77 Status: RO Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2422 Mike: Thanks for your comments. Regarding to the closed-eye issue, I have addressed my comments to Vivex's e-mail. Regards, Edward S. Chang NetWorth Technologies, Inc. EChang@NetWorthtech.com Tel: (610)292-2870 Fax: (610)292-2872 -----Original Message----- From: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mike Wincn Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 4:31 PM To: Edward Chang; NetWorthTK@aol.com; vivek@cicada-semi.com; stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org Subject: RE: PAM-5, what are your BERs ? Ed: At 02:17 PM 29-02-2000 -0500, Edward Chang wrote: >We are discussing the product developments, which are based on proved >theorems and equations to mathematically calculate all designs. After that, >setting up tests to confirm that the test data, and the analyses are >correlated. Otherwise, repeat the procedures to achieve the goals. >Finally, it will go through extensive system tests and BER tests to certify >a product. > >Engineers do not just "looking at a scope", then make the comment. They >theorize it, quantify it, then make comments. right. that may have been a bad choice of analogy, on my part. i apologize if i have offended anyone. in my read of this thread things seem fairly clear -- i gather, from all of this, that Vivek has a lot of experience in this, perhaps you do too. it's my experience that Vivek's assessment is accurate, as posted. >Unless, some one has extensive communication product development experience >in the past, it is hard for a one to grasp, and appreciate the contents of >the comments put forward on reflectors by those serious contributors. agreed. in any event a more rigorous proof is best delivered in an HSSG meeting. here, we can best highlight one or more concerns. >[...] >The cascading of the frequency response of each component to predict the >over-all system frequency response is a well known basic tool implemented by >all circuit designers. It is as predictable as, 1+1 = 2. well, i suppose so, though i'm not certain i follow your analogy. here, i want to suggest that observation of "a closed eye diagram" may be 'necessary' but isn't always -sufficient- indication of intolerably high BER. i believe there must be additional work. -- J M Wincn, Staff Engineer Cielo Communications, Inc. 325 Interlocken Pkwy, Bldg A Broomfield, CO 80021-3497 Voice: 303-464-2264 Cell: 408-394-5283 Fax: 303-460-6348