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

Re: PMD discussion


I agree with you. However, I believe that we are loosing sight of the ultimate
goal of the WAN PHY: Compatibility with the SONET/SDH infrastructure. 

I'd like to address a comment regarding our objectives that was made during the
Ottawa meeting on several occasions: It was said that a LAN PHY with a WIS (for
SONET/SDH compatibility) does not meet the HSSG objectives. I'm having trouble
understanding why a solution which "exceeds" the objectives, and is highly
likely to be lower in cost, is inferior to one which "meets" the objectives.

The specific objective in question is as follows:

Define two families of PHYs
 A LAN PHY, operating at a data rate of 10.000 Gb/s
 A WAN PHY, operating at a data rate compatible with the payload rate of
OC-192c/SDH VC-4-64c

It has been proposed, and there is general agreement (i.e. lack of any other
proposal) that the WIS, a layer 1 (PHY) sublayer is used to encapsulate Ethernet
packets, using 64B/66B for a PCS, for transport over SONET/SDH. The latest
relevant proposals from Ottawa are:

The location of the WIS in a WAN PHY can be illustrated as follows:

    +-----+    +-----+        +-----+    +-----+ 
--->|     |--->| PHY |------->|     |--->|SONET|
    | MAC |    |     | medium | PHY |    |  \  |
<---|     |<---|(WIS)|<-------|     |<---| SDH |
    +-----+    +-----+        +-----+    +-----+ 
  controlled)   |<--- WAN PHY ---->|
Alternatively, the location of the WIS in a LAN PHY can be illustrated as

    +-----+    +-----+        +-----+    +-----+ 
--->|     |--->|     |------->| PHY |--->|SONET|
    | MAC |    | PHY | medium |     |    |  \  |
<---|     |<---|     |<-------|(WIS)|<---| SDH |
    +-----+    +-----+        +-----+    +-----+ 
  controlled)   |<--- LAN PHY ---->|

Note that the WIS function simply moves to the right (towards SONET/SDH) and the
same PHY, a LAN "UniPHY" if you will, may be used to achieve full SONET
compatibility. MAC/PHY rate control is not issue between the two methods. I
understand how to implement it either way.

Please point out the flaw(s) with the LAN UniPHY in supporting Ethernet over
SONET. Is it that there is a unwritten requirement for a WAN PHY to support
payloads other than Ethernet over SONET/SDH? I'd call any such requirements out
of the scope of IEEE 802.3.

Best Regards,

jay.hoge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> In order for the WAN PHY to do its job, it cann't use a line code or else
> the data rate will exceed that of OC-192. Scrambling anyone?
> Jay
Richard Taborek Sr.                 Phone: 408-845-6102       
Chief Technology Officer             Cell: 408-832-395 
nSerial Corporation                   Fax: 408-845-6114
2500-5 Augustine Dr.        mailto:rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxx
Santa Clara, CA 95054