PMD Interface thread 1024 / Re: PMD discussion
Rich and all
Not to put words in Roys emails, but I think his confussion was/is the same as mine. 8B10b over cwdm, for all practical purposes, is
XUAI extended over the optical link. I am sure there is some cdr there, I would have to go back to the presentations from the CWDM guys,
but in raw form, CWDM is XUAI cdr extended. I don't agree with it because I think the optical line coding blocks should be the same for
consistancy. But, like all engineers, I could change my mind later :).
I think further, there is the question of a serial 10gig optical part - I must have been sleeping or something, but there is the issue
that if we want to use 10gig serial optics today for the standard, we will need to use the OIF 16x622 interface until something XUAI like
is ready. Does this mean we should spec the interface, too?
Sorry if you have to touch some of these issues two or three times .... us farm boys can be a little slow on the uptake :).
Take care
Joel
-------------------------
Rich Taborek wrote:
> 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
--
Joel Goergen
Force10 Networks
1440 McCarthy blvd
Milpitas, Ca, 95035
Email: joel@force10networks.com
Direct: (408) 571-3694
Cell: (612) 670-5930
Fax: (408) 571-3550