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

RE: Long distance links




Hi Bill,

I think 8B10B, MAS, scrambling, etc.. are all PHY issues that need to 
be resolved in their proper order. My personal opinion is that we should
at least try to conclude quickly that a 10.0000 Gigabit MAC/PLS 
interface with an NRZ encoded, n-bit wide XGMII are within grasp for
concensus. The concept of a "Hold" signal or other such mechanism to
allow PHYs that run at lower speeds to be attached to the MAC should
be running close to concensus.

Now, with that said, I think it is reasonable to expect that we will
have a number of different PHY solutions that reside below the XGMII;

1) WAN PHY running 9.58464 Gbps over SM fiber (High cost, but WAN)
2) LAN PHY running 10.0000 Gbps over SM/(MM?) fiber (Lower cost)
3) Cu PHY running 10.0000 Gbps over short links??? (Really Low cost)

Of course, this is my opinion of the way things should be, so if you
add 1 Pound_British, you can use it to purchase a mug of Ale.

Regards,

Dan Dove
___________     _________________________________________________________
_________    _/    ___________  Daniel Dove         Principal Engineer __
_______     _/        ________  dan_dove@xxxxxx     LAN PHY Technology __
_____      _/           ______  Hewlett-Packard Company                __
____      _/_/_/ _/_/_/  _____  Workgroup Networks Division            __
____     _/  _/ _/  _/   _____  8000 Foothills Blvd. MS 5555           __
_____   _/  _/ _/_/_/   ______  Roseville, CA 95747-5555               __
______        _/      ________  Phone: 916 785 4187                    __
_______      _/      _________  Fax  : 916 785 1815                    __
__________  _/ __________________________________________________________


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill St. Arnaud [mailto:Bill.St.Arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 1999 6:05 PM
> To: DOVE,DANIEL J (HP-Roseville,ex1); HSSG
> Subject: RE: Long distance links
> 
> 
> I have missed a number of e-mails so I share your confusion.  
> Perhaps this
> topic has already been covered in earlier discussions.  But 
> wouldn't the
> data packet of a 10Gbe at 10.000 GBps with 8b/10b coding (if 
> that is the
> agreed upon coding mechanism??)  easily map into a SONET 
> OC-192 SPE (with
> room to spare) if we have a transcoding mechanism at the 
> SONET interface to
> map from native 10GbE to 10GbE over SONET using standard NRZ scarmbled
> coding??  If we wanted to, we could even easily map the 
> 8b/10b coded packet
> to PPP over HDLC over SONET and still have room to spare
> 
> Bill
> 
> Bill St. Arnaud
> Senior Director Network Projects
> CANARIE
> bill.st.arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
> +1 613 785-0426
> rest of post deleted...