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

Re: What is 802.3ae WAN-PHY?


"SONET Lite" is a term that has been used for some time to mean a reduced
overhead requirement customer drop interface.  T1.416-99 defines the
required and optional byte usage for "SONET Lite".  The plezioisosynchronous
timing standard is currently being worked on.  It should be a full standard
definition very soon.  In this regard, the "ELTE" is acutely a special case
non-muxing LTE that is part of the T1X1 standards.  The SONET test sets that
are used for POS today already have to be adjusted to allow for wider clock
and jitter tolerance.

Thank you,
Roy Bynum

----- Original Message -----
From: Osamu ISHIDA <ishida@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Roy Bynum <rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: What is 802.3ae WAN-PHY?

> Roy,
> Yes, I am assuming that the ELTE has something to do with Ethernet.
> As I understand, the emerging non-muxing LTE requires SONET-
> compliant input. I would like to remind you that at present I see no
> SONET-lite standard in the real world.
> Therefore, at least you need to customize the Ethernet side of the
> non-muxing LTE to accomodate +/-100ppm SONET-imcompliant input.
> I don't believe this customization makes sense because;
> (1) it will bring nothing other than confusion, as Jay and Gary has
>     pointed out.
> (2) There seems to be little cost advantage in +/-100ppm as Nevin has
>     pointed out.
> Please do not force us to stick in SONET framing optimized for the
> legacy synchronous transport systems.
> You are free to invest both the SONET-imcompliant PHY and the ELTE,
> but please understand that there are other carriers who must compete
> with each other and hence require inexpensive future-proof OAM&P
> signaling for datacom WAN.  To drive it, I will propose SONET-
> compatible XGENIE that enables us to carry SONET overhead bytes or
> its equivalence without using the SONET framing.  I don't think
> this is a full greenfield development; just a kind of 1:1 mapping
> between XGENIE ordered sets and SONET overhead bytes.
> Best Regards,
> Osamu
> At 2:47 PM -0500 00.4.6, Roy Bynum wrote:
> > Osamu,
> >
> > Are you making the assumption that ELTE has anything to do with
> > ELTE is a fake name that was used by the nomenclature group to as a
> > holder for a non-muxing LTE.  The ELTE is refereeing to the new class of
> > SONET/SDH optical switch gear that has been developed specifically to
> > support high bandwidth concatenated services.  There are several
> > vendors that are developing this equipment with the view to start
> > this year to support the OC192C/STM64C Packet Over SONET/SDH interfaces
> > Internet Routers.
> >
> > Please make the assumption that SONET framing will be used.  Otherwise
> > will require a full greenfield development cycle and extended deployment
> > cycle for the long haul transport systems.  This is in violation of the
> > objective to use existing technology where ever possible.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Roy Bynum
> > ----- Original Message -----