Re: PMD discussion
Roy,
I'm not sure where your confusion is coming from, please explain.
All initial LAN WDM PHY proposals as well as those currently in front of the
Task Force employ 8B/10B encoding. This coding choice has been essentially
stable for more than a year now. 64B/66B has never been formally proposed as a
PCS for LAN WDM PHYs.
64B/66B has been proposed as the PCS for the LAN Serial PHY since approximately
the November, 1999 meeting.
Best Regards,
Rich
--
Roy Bynum wrote:
>
> Rich,
>
> Now I am confused. It was my understanding that the LAN only PHY would be using 64b/66b, just like what is being forced on the WAN
> compatible PHY. If so, then it was my understanding that the parallel/CWDM PMD would also be 64b/66b.
>
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rich Taborek" <rtaborek@earthlink.net>
> To: "HSSG" <stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org>
> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 2:35 AM
> Subject: Re: PMD discussion
>
> >
> > Ed,
> >
> > Done! I completely agree to drop this tangent and focus on PMD issues.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Rich
> >
> > --
> >
> > NetWorthTK@aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Rich:
> > >
> > > I believe you misunderstood my mail to conclude your comments too quickly.
> > >
> > > I never mentioned that I like the 12.5 Gbps 8B/10B coding to be replaced by
> > > 10.3125 Gbps 64b/66b.
> > >
> > > We are discussing serial vs parallel issues.
> > >
> > > We are too much involved in resolving PMD issues right now, and I believe no
> > > one is interested in bring the coding scheme back to reflector at this moment.
> > >
> > > Please do not intiate this one. let us focuse on PMD issues.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Ed Chang
-------------------------------------------------------
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@nSerial.com
Santa Clara, CA 95054 http://www.nSerial.com