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

[802.3ae] D3.1 Clause 45 and Clause 48 potential inconsistencies

Hi there,
I would like to clarify certain things regarding LF, RF and Link Status:

1.Status bit 5.1.7 suppose to to be set by the transmitter if it detects a
LF sequence in its input OR set by the receiver if it detects LF in its
inputs? I think it is NOT set if the receiver detects inter lane miss
alignment condition (That is, it is not set by the receiver if the receiver
GENERATES LF as opposed to DETECTING LF). Is that so?

2.The term "DETECT LF" stands for detecting LF sequence in the input to a
certain function? If a receiver detects miss alignment, and generates LF as
a result, it is not said to be LF DETECTION event?

3. Status bit 5.8.11 detects LF on the transmit path of the DTE-XS. That is,
set by the transmitter when it detects an LF sequence in its input in the
DTE-XS. Bit 4.8.11 does the same for the PHY_XS. But here, transmit path
means that the PHY-XS XAUI Receiver has to set this bit. So, according to
the current definition, depending on this XGXS function, PHY-XS or DTE-XS,
this bit is set by different modules in any of the cases.

4.The same is true  for bits 5.8.10 vs. 4.8.10

It would be better to define:

5.8.11 as Tx path LF Detection for DTE-XS
4.8.11 as Rx path LF Detection for PHY-XS
5.8.10 as Rx path LF Detection for DTE-XS
4.8.10 as Tx  path LF Detection for PHY-XS

BTW this method works in all other cases of symmetrical functionality
between PHY-XS and DTE-XS because it saves a MUX in the implementation, and
more consistent.
CLAUSE 48 Question
Section defines local_fault as follows: "A local fault condition
is recognized by the PCS whenever align_status=fail". Combining this
definition with those in clause 45 can lead to the erroneous conclusion that
the events "Link Status Fail" and "Local fault detection" are identical. So
I think it should be changed either in 45 or in 48 (Unless this is really
the intention).

Best regards,