Re: headless chicken
I agree with most of your suggestions. Please allow me to re-iterate them to
insure our level of understanding:
1) Link_status is already defined as Status register bit
Osamu ISHIDA wrote:
> Thanks for your clear definition of Break Link and Remote Fault.
> My point has been that we had better specify the two management
> register bits advertised by Link Signaling; RemoteFault of the
> STATUS register bit (Local Sync Up/Down), and BreakLink of the
> CONTROL register bit (Local Isolate or something else). I believe
> that this two-bit advertising allows us flexible PHY implementation
> yet preserving the strict Ethernet inter-operability.
> Also it would be a good idea to define the Link Status bit in the
> status register to indicate 'Duplex Link Up with valid MAC partner'.
> I think this status bit shall be implemented with a latching
> function, such that the occurrence of a NotOK condition will
> be remained until it is read via the management interface.
> I agree with your definition below except the BL priority.
> The LSS Link Status Code reported once ever 125 usec will carry 3-bit
> information even with minimum 4-bit Hamming protection, and hence
> RemoteFault and BreakLink can be advertised simultaneously.
> I don't see any requirement to give priority to BreakLink over
> RemoteFault. Either or both of them causes Link Status NotOK.
> Best Regards,
> At 18:54 00/06/27 -0700, Rich Taborek wrote:
> > However, I urge you to keep the LSS protocol simple and not include any
> > implementation specific features. My view of Remote Fault (RF) and Break Link
> > (BL) protocol is as follows:
> > Remote Fault:
> > - LSS signals RF whenever the link, including all lanes, is not synchronized;
> > - LSS RF signaling occurs once every 125 usec +/- 14 usec;
> > - Received RF is indicated in a management register (TBD).
> > Break Link:
> > - LSS signals BL upon management initiative;
> > - BL has priority over RF;
> > - LSS BL signaling occurs once every 125 usec +/- 14 usec;
> > - Received BL is indicated in a management registers (TBD).
> > Link Status:
> > - Set to OK when the link, including all lanes, is synchronized; and,
> > - RF or BL is not being received;
> > - Set to FAIL otherwise.
> > Osamu ISHIDA wrote:
> > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/email/msg02810.html
> > >
> > > Local Device #1 Remote Device #2
> > >
> > > MAC MAC
> > > | STA #1 STA #2 |
> > > PHY Register Register PHY
> > > | Local State #1 State |
> > > | Sync Up/Down --(RemoteFault#1)----> |
> > > | Isolate ---(BreakLink#1)-----> |
> > > | Remote State #2 State |
> > > | <----(RemoteFault#2)-- Sync Up/Down |
> > > | <-----(BreakLink#2)--- Isolate |
> > > |_________________________________________________|
> Osamu ISHIDA
> NTT Network Innovation Laboratories
> TEL +81-468-59-3263 FAX +81-468-55-1282
Richard Taborek Sr. Phone: 408-845-6102
Chief Technology Officer Cell: 408-832-3957
nSerial Corporation Fax: 408-845-6114
2500-5 Augustine Dr. mailto:rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxx
Santa Clara, CA 95054 http://www.nSerial.com