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

Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] Electrical Ad-Hoc Straw Poll



Andre 

I vote for option 2.

Before agreeing to option 3, I would like to see potential COM penalty on the 50G-CR1/200G-CR4 due to strong SQRT(F) response from ball to ball!
If there is no COM penalty for 50G-CR1/200G-CR4 then I am open to option 4, as I don’t want to potentially break universal host paradigm supporting optics and Cu cable.
 
Thanks,
Ali Ghiasi
Ghiasi Quantum LLC


On Apr 26, 2017, at 1:28 AM, Andre Szczepanek <aszczepanek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

At today’s P802.3bs Electrical Ad-Hoc meeting I announced we would have a straw poll on options for the C2M Insertion Loss equation based on discussion following the presentation of mellitz_01b_042417_elect.

 

·       Option 1: Do nothing

·       Option 2:

       Change  “The supported insertion loss budget is characterized by Equation (120E–1) and illustrated in Figure 120E–4. “  to “The recommended insertion loss budget is characterized by Equation (120E–1) and illustrated in Figure 120E–4. “

       Add “recommended” to the title of Figure 120E-4.

·       Option 3: Change the insertion loss equation to the equation given in Slide 14 “Option B” of mellitz_01b_042417_elect.

·       Option 4: Implement the changes in both options 2 & 3 above.

 

Please send me an email specifying your preferred option (select only one).

-         Don’t get hung up on exact values. This is a straw poll, nothing is definitive – we just want to establish a direction for the group.

 

Regards

                 Andre Szczepanek (Electrical Ad Hoc chair)