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

RE: Why not have both?

Title: RE: Why not have both?

Great picture... definitely speaks a thousand words.

I agree that there is a need for two distinct PHYs (PCS and PMA) to service the WAN PMD(s) and the LAN PMD(s).  From the discussions on the reflector, I believe that the HSSG has come to a similar consensus.

I agree that a 10.0 Gb/s MAC/PLS data rate with a pacing mechanism will satisfy the requirements of the WAN.  I believe that by setting a goal of 10.0 Gb/s for the MAC/PLS data rate, we will make the standards work an easier task.  I think that we could also add a note in the "standard" to indicate that the 10GMII or XGMII can be designed to operate at a lower data rate for WAN-specific implementations.  I don't think we need an objective for that (because it is too specific), and I'm sure the WAN people will keep us honest about it.  I feel that the pacing mechanism is going to be a tough issue, but at least if we set the objective then we can worry about how to do it once we get the PAR and critters (5 criteria) done.

Thanks for putting that together.  I hope others realize that the objectives you listed don't impede various implementations but enable us to proceed with a well-defined standards focus.