Re: Data rate standards vs internal switching standards
Ariel,
Where would the additional bytes of the variable IPG originate? Where
would they go? What would happen to them between the MAC and the PHY?
What happens when the MAC at 10.0 gb is operationally overloaded?
How do you tell that the PHY is operationally overloaded beyond 9.584
gb? How would you tell the difference? Is there any difference?
Would not putting a limit on effective transfer rate at the MAC by the
PHY be the same as putting the limit on the MAC to start with? I
personally can not see any difference, except that you loose
visibility of the start of overloading conditions at the network
management level.
The whole argument of 10.0 versus 9.584 has to do will transfer rate
saturation and overloading. How the internal functions of the switch
handles the saturation and overloading conditions, becomes very
critical when there is a difference between the effective transfer
rate of the MAC and the PHY. When the internal functions can clock the
data into the MAC at a transfer rate higher than what the MAC can transfer
it out, can create a major problem.
If the internal switch functions can not transfer data to the MAC at
a rate that is higher than what the MAC can transfer it out, then it
becomes an internal control issue. Individual vendors can resolve
the blocking issue by, for example issuing flow control frames out
the input ports. Without direct visibility to the transfer rate, that
becomes more difficult.
Thank you,
Roy Bynum
MCI WorldCom
Date: Wed Aug 04, 1999 11:12 am CST
Source-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 10:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ariel Hendel
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: Ariel.Hendel@eng.sun.com
TO: Ariel.Hendel
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: Ariel.Hendel@eng.sun.com
TO: stds-802-3-hssg
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org
TO: * ROY BYNUM / MCI ID: 424-5935
Subject: Re: Data rate standards vs internal switching standards
Message-Id: 99080417120456/INTERNETGWDN1IG
Source-Msg-Id: <199908041712.KAA03822@mpk02.eng.sun.com>
U-X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.2 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
U-Content-MD5: NFmZkLW1UAJg7cpef41TRw==
> Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 10:19:28 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Roy Bynum <RBYNUM/0004245935@MCIMAIL.COM>
> Subject: Re: Data rate standards vs internal switching standards
> To: Ariel Hendel <Ariel.Hendel@eng.sun.com>, stds-802-3-hssg
<stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org>
>
> Ariel,
>
> Actually, I am not in favor of a programmable IPG. I think that the IPG
> should be set to minimum for all frames in full duplex 10GbE. With 400
> bytes as the current average size of Internet 802.3 frames, I don't
> think that there will be enough "slop" to make up the difference
> between a 10.0 gb MAC and a 9.584 gb PHY. In the future, with more
> and more video based applications, the average size of the data frame
> will be increasing. This will only cause the MAC buffer discard rate
> to increase if the MAC and PHY are not data rate matched. I would much
> rather see the data rate be defined at the MAC, not the PHY.
>
My apologies for being dense on this thread, just one last hypothetical
question for Roy.
Would you accept a 10Gbps rate along with a variable IPG?
The IPG is just simple function of the length of the last packet sent
to guarantee that the payload rate does not exceed your OC-192 rate.
Open loop, interoperable, no pins, no thresholds, no nothing.
Would you settle for that or you still prefer the 9.xyz rate?
Thanks,
Ariel